Jump to content

Intel native retrospect client?

Recommended Posts

Does anyone here know if there is ever going to be an intel-native version of the Retrospect client for Mac OS X? Right now, our MacPros backup *almost* as fast as our older G5 servers used to. I wondered why until I opened Activity viewer and found that all Retrospect processes were running as PowerPC, and not Intel. Since the Intel Macs have been out for quite sometime, I think that it's time for an upgrade to the client software to take advantage of the increased speed.


Comments welcome, EMC!


Marc Hoffman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, we will have a Universal client, but I don't have timeline.


An intel native client is probably not going to provide much of a boost in transfer speeds. The speed of the client is typically not the bottleneck. FileIO is your biggest limit along with network speeds, disk speeds, backup device speeds, etc. The client already uses Xcode and not open transport (another bottleneck) when the backup server is Retro for Windows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is good news! However, just to clear things up for you, the MacPro servers are on the same network connections, same hard drives, same SCSI cards, as the two G5 servers that the intel units replaced. Typically, on the G5s, we got about 1600 megabytes/minute. On the MacPros, we are getting around 1100 megabytes/minute. Yes, it's not THAT big of a difference, but when a complete backup over the weekend takes more that 48 hours, those 500mb/minute do add up.


One other thing to note: the Intel MacPros are not identical. They are both dual, dual core Xeons. But one is 2GHz per CPU core, and the other is 2.6GHz per core. The one with the 2.6GHz cores typically backs up faster than the slower unit. However, both Intel units are still slower backing up than the two 2GHz G5 units.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing to consider is whether paging is slowing down the Intel performance. Because Rosetta is being used to emulate the PPC code on the Intel Macs, you've got Rosetta wallowing in about 1/2 to 3/4 GB of RAM, so you need to allow more RAM for Rosetta to cache its translated PPC code, and for Rosetta itself. So it's not just the emulation that can give you a performance hit, and multiple cores put their own demands on RAM. If you've got gobs of RAM, then this isn't an issue.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...