[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference decwet::networker

Title:	NetWorker
Notice:	kits - 12-14, problem reporting - 41.*, basics 1-100
Moderator:	DECWET::RANDALL.com::lenox

Created:	Thu Oct 10 1996
Last Modified:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	750
Total number of notes:	3361

597.0. "Multiple networks for a unique client." by BACHUS::DEVOS (Manu Devos NSIS Brussels 856-7539) Sun Apr 20 1997 12:35

    Hi,
    
    I have a pair of 8400 in ASE with 4 Ethernet adaptors each. One is the
    server and the other is a "cluster host".
    
    I wanted to benefit of the extra throughput provided by the 4 networks
    by creating multiple definitions of a single client by spreading the
    filesystems amongst these multiple client definition.
    
    Unfortunately, when I created the second instance of a unique client
    and tried to select the Network interface to use, it changed also the
    one of the first client.
    
    So, I can spread the numerous filesystems on multiple client
    definitions, but I am condamned to use the same network ;-(
    
    Is it a bug, a feature or am I missing something ?
    
    Thanks for ny help...
    
    Manu.

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
597.1	???	BACHUS::DEVOS	Manu Devos NSIS Brussels 856-7539	`Fri Apr 25 1997 04:24`	6
	No idea, anybody ? Can I use different network for multiple client definitions ??? Manu.
597.2		SANITY::LEMONS	And we thank you for your support.	`Fri Apr 25 1997 07:53`	7
	Hi Manu I can't answer your question (sorry!), but I can say that you can have multiple IP addresses per network adapter. I use that feature heavily on our backup server. tl
597.3	:-(	BACHUS::DEVOS	Manu Devos NSIS Brussels 856-7539	`Fri Apr 25 1997 13:50`	11
	So, I should conclude that there is NO WAY to increase the throughput of a given client which is determined by its highest speed network. I should have hoped to increase the throughput by spreading the load on 4 networks... No idea, Bruce, Kevin, and the other Thanks in advance, Manu.
597.4		DECWET::FARLEE	Insufficient Virtual um...er....	`Mon Apr 28 1997 11:38`	12
	I was out of town at the US UNIX Symposium last week, so that's why no response from me. I believe that the field you're using is configured to ensure that all copies of a client have consistent values. This is a feature that could be modified in a future release if there is sufficient demand. Typically, however, I see people going to FDDI rather than multiple ethernets when they run out of network bandwidth. Kevin
597.5	Could be a nice feature !	BACHUS::DEVOS	Manu Devos NSIS Brussels 856-7539	`Mon Apr 28 1997 13:59`	19
	Hi Kevin, > This is a feature that could be modified in a future release if > there is sufficient demand. Typically, however, I see people going > to FDDI rather than multiple ethernets when they run out of network > bandwidth. Decsafe is actively marketing multi-networks solutions as they improved Availability. If NetWorker could benefit of this feature at the performance point of view, we could easily justify that cost to the customer. It would be the best of two worlds in one solution... Our dream in fact ... :-) By the way, do you prefer Belgian chocolates or Belgian beers for the NSR team ? See you in Berlin, Manu.
597.6	Sheesh, tough call!!	DECWET::EVANS	NSR Engineering	`Thu May 01 1997 15:32`	4
	I'd have to say.... Chocolate, but the beer would be a veeeeerrrrryyyy close second. Bruce (who-won't-be-in-Berlin-sigh)
597.7		DECWET::FARLEE	Insufficient Virtual um...er....	`Fri May 02 1997 14:46`	8
	Manu, Tell you what, it would be easier for me to bring chocolate back (more likely to make it all the way back, if you know what I mean) We can still have a beer in Berlin, though. Look me up. Kevin