That's kind of a stiff order, Matt! Can't affect the performance of the
production box? I don't know if that can be achieved.

When you start fetching that data off the drives to send it (ftp was a
good plan) it is going to busy out the drive arms and the data channels
from the drive controllers. No matter what, this will cause conflict
with live jobs.

Did you try just giving it a terrible priority? Like 55 or something? It
will take forever and it will still cause some delays (data has to
physically move so that takes time and hardware use), but it might be
gentle enough on your live box to live with.

Matt Patee wrote:

 >I looked in the archives and did not find anything very apparent. I would
 >appreciate any suggestions:
 >
 >Without using tape (don't ask), what is the best way to transfer a large
 >library (40gb) from one system to another? It doesn't have to be fast, but
 >I need it to not affect the performance of my production system (where I'm
 >sending from).
 >
 >I tried FTP, but it ended up slowing the production box. Any help would be
 >appreciated.
 >
 >
 >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 >Matthew Patee
 >Midrange Systems Manager
 >ABM Industries
 >(415) 351-4309
 >fax:(415) 351-4331

--
Chris Rehm
javadisciple@earthlink.net

Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one
that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. 1 John 4:7



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.