rocketmanx

Member
  • Content Count

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About rocketmanx

  • Rank
    Member
  1. rocketmanx

    Backup rotations

    Thanks Chewy Turns out the Guys that built the server setup the media set and had ovewrite protection set to infinite. So all the tapes that have been used up until I made a new daily job set to overwrite all tapes are not able to be overwritten. Time to erase some tapes.
  2. rocketmanx

    Backup rotations

    Nice thread I've been working on a new backup rotation at work for the same reasons as buzz. Only diff is I have taken over the cto from my brother and we both are owners Our backup routine sucked, until we lost a whole server about a month ago. Server would run but to do anything else would lockup the machine, backups wouldn't run either. Luckily all our data was salvagable, even though we upgraded to Win2k3 server it was still pretty painless. I'm pretty new to backup software, what's the use in having a media set? If you set to overwrite media doesn't it make zero differnence what the tapes labeled as long as it labels it by date? We are now using the 10 tape rotation as you guys described with the current daily going in the deposit bag each night and the last days is picked up with the last days bag. Occasionally our tapes are rejected (my Sister is in charge of changing tapes since she sits next to the server) and with blanks in reserve this is kinda of a pain. I didn't setup the rotation to start with and am not sure why you would use a "media set" other than to make sure you have the proper tape in roation. I have created a new job (use Veritas) and it names the tape by the date, any problems with that? What kind of naming conventions you guys using? Any advice, or no big deal as long as you know the date of the backup. I also am trying to setup the email notification, handy feature so I don't have to remember to look at the server each morning.
  3. rocketmanx

    LCD monitor suggestions

    Agree with honold on all posts here. I'm using that very NEC lcd right now and love it. Color sensitive work it's not as accurate as a CRT (which I prefer) but the pisture is very sharp and looks better than my brothers 17" Dell Ultrasharp. Color is better than most I have seen too, with good off axis viewing.
  4. rocketmanx

    Mylex Acceleraid 352

    Just got a Mylex Acceleraid 352 w/128 mb cache. HAven't done much with SCSI raid so was wonderin if you guys had some tips on setup for performance. Intended use is with my 2 Cheetah 15k's in Raid 0. This wil be the OS drive. Not sure about settings like, write-thru or write-back..... Stripe size suggestions would be good too. WinXP is the OS.
  5. rocketmanx

    SCSI raid 0 lock-up

    I have a pair of Cheetah 15k 18 gig's on an Adaptec 2100s ( I know but it was cheap ) in raid 0. One drive is set to id 0 and the other to id 1. The stripe worked great for about a month until I rebuilt the box, adding some water cooling, and since the rebuild the box locks after the post screens. No jumper or settings changes were made and all components are as they were before. I deleted the array and re-installed my 29160 card to test the drives. All was well and WinXP had no problems with the drives, formatting wnet fine and no disk errors. Decided to check the 2100s and after the reinstall, with no drives attached the machine booted fine and WinXP re-installed the card and all appeared well. Decided to re-try the raid setup and as soon as I hooked the drives back up to the 2100s the box would lock after the post screens I've tried a new cable and 2 other drives and all do the same thing. I assume it's my card but it appears fine when installed on it's own. Anyone have any suggstions? My settings on the 2100s are all default settings. Any possible jumper settings on the drives caause thios problem? All other system components check out ok. My system is as follows: WinXP Pro Asus A7N8X Deluxe w/ 2600 XP (no overclock and conservative settings in bios for inital box testing) 1.5 gig Corsair XMS 3500 2- Cheetah 15k 1- Maxtor DX740 120 gig 1- HP DVD burner 1-Pioneer 16x slot load dvd Audigy 2 Platinum 1-Matrix Orbital USB Radeon 9700 various other attached devices
  6. rocketmanx

    Terrible SCSI performance in Windows XP

    Microsofts already stated SP1 WON'T fix the problem. No need to be in a big rush. We've all waited this long.
  7. rocketmanx

    Terrible SCSI performance in Windows XP

    Just got my new Maximum PC and they have a short mention in WatchDog about this problem as they ran into when making the Dream Machine for 2002. They say that SP1 for XP will not fix the problem but that Microsoft shares the blame for the problem and will have a fix out in the next 3 months. They state that it's because they (Microsoft) told developers to set FILE_FLAG_WRITE_THROUGH and FILE_FLAG_NO_BUFFERING to obtain better perfromance with older OS versions (Win2k's supposed to have the problem but it doesn't show unless you disable write caching). Microsofts Goldner also states that they have seen up to a 10X performance hit depending on packet size. Goes to show we are all not Crazy!!! And a fix is on the way!!! Pete
  8. rocketmanx

    Terrible SCSI performance in Windows XP

    pprior- I've noticed that as well but, I'm sitting at my win2k machine with scsi drives and a Zip250 usb similar to my home scsi machine with XP and they both do the "access" thing.
  9. rocketmanx

    Terrible SCSI performance in Windows XP

    Forgot to mention to slelct ATTO ExpressPro-Tools after filling in your name and email, then select pci-scsi version
  10. rocketmanx

    Terrible SCSI performance in Windows XP

    http://www.attotech.com/software/index.html Version 1.63
  11. rocketmanx

    Terrible SCSI performance in Windows XP

    Tere's definitely something to that. I can't post any graphics but, I tried my Atlas 10kII with an Adaptec 29160 in ATTO under win98/me compatibilty mode and got 157,432! on the initial .5k read test!? By the time it got to 16k it was up to over 470,000 8O Something not right here with atto and XP. I have also tried win2k again and haven't noticed any increase in "snappiness" or "feel" when searching or copying files and as I think I said earlier in this thread I get the same poor small size write/read results in 2K as I do in XP. I seem to be the only one getting this siutation though (exact smae machine reinstalled with Win2k). Just ran in win2k comp. mode for kicks and got the same results as in xp with no comp. mode. Just some more info to stir into the pot.
  12. rocketmanx

    Terrible SCSI performance in Windows XP

    Gravelayer, ho about some machine driver specs so we can compare?
  13. rocketmanx

    Terrible SCSI performance in Windows XP

    Sorry should have clarified, enabling write cache kills my read rates in XP and 2K and makes write rates worse but not as much of a hit as reads take.
  14. rocketmanx

    Terrible SCSI performance in Windows XP

    Wasn't sure what the Delayed transaction did, but It had to be coincidence because I'm right back to where I was this morning I wold love to see others get involved as well as I'm not one to sit around waiting for a fix. I'll totally hose my install over and over looking (more like flailing as my comp knowledge is very limited in depth when it comes to software) for something. So far the only similarities I have seen are scsi disks and XP although I (seem to be the only one) get the same results in 2K Pro as I do in XP Pro, weird. The only thing that makes a difference so far has been enabling write cache in 2K.
  15. rocketmanx

    Terrible SCSI performance in Windows XP

    I got Win2k installed on second drive with same results XP. :evil: I started looking for other stuff to try so I decided to dig through my bios again and some settings I usually don't mess with. Well I just enabled and PCI delayed transaction and my write speeds are now at 35 mb/sec @ 4 in ATTO and 39 mb/sec reads. I now get the first write result as 2305 and the read as 12504 instead of 84 and 140 or something crazy like that. I don't know if it's anything yet (or could be) but I seem to be getting much better results in benchmarks and the snappiness of searching through files is unbelievable it's like it's hyperactive now. Maybe someone else could try this out.