Re: Ontape restore hangs

"Doug Lawry" <lawry@nildram.co.uk> wrote in message news:N5mdnfW0JLeCrkfVnZ2dnUVZ8v6dnZ2d@pipex.net... > This turned out just to be slow performance rather than a hung ontape, and > increasing TAPESIZE makes all the difference even when using backup images > on disk. It may be peculiar to this disk array (Dell PowerVault MD3000). > > Astonishingly, with TAPESIZE 1024 (the largest suggested value I had seen) > instead of 32 (the default), the restore completed in 55 minutes (about > the same as "dd") instead of several hours, so I'll be making this change > everywhere else! You should get a top Informix consultant called Paul Watson in for a day. He's always banging on about the performance benefits of large TAPEBLK ...!

Captain Pedantic wrote: > "Doug Lawry" <lawry@nildram.co.uk> wrote in message > news:N5mdnfW0JLeCrkfVnZ2dnUVZ8v6dnZ2d@pipex.net... > >> This turned out just to be slow performance rather than a hung ontape, and >> increasing TAPESIZE makes all the difference even when using backup images >> on disk. It may be peculiar to this disk array (Dell PowerVault MD3000). >> >> Astonishingly, with TAPESIZE 1024 (the largest suggested value I had seen) >> instead of 32 (the default), the restore completed in 55 minutes (about >> the same as "dd") instead of several hours, so I'll be making this change >> everywhere else! >> > > You should get a top Informix consultant called Paul Watson in for a day. > He's always banging on about the performance benefits of large TAPEBLK ...! > Clowns do too ... ;o) -- Cheers, Obnoxio the Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com