LUNs mapped to mount points are much slower than mapped to Drive letters

Discussion in 'Windows Server' started by bd, Dec 20, 2006.

  1. bd

    bd Guest

    Running:

    Windows2003 sp1. iSCSI initiator 2.02. NetApp SnapDrive 4.1

    Each night we back up mapped snapshots from our NetApp Filers on a backup
    server. We had been mapping the LUNs to drive letters to do the backups,
    but we have so many now we have run out of letters. Instead, we started
    taking advantage of the ability in win2003 to map LUNs to mount points.

    However, we took a big performance hit for this. Throughput went from 86
    GB/hr to 51 GB/hr. Nothing else has changed. Switching back to drive
    letters boosts performance back to 86. Now our largest job is not finishing
    in the time window we have allocated. Anyone familiar with this issue? Why
    is performance with mount points so much worse than drive letters?
     
    bd, Dec 20, 2006
    #1

    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads

  1. Dimension 8400 with Vista x64 MUCH slower than XP x86

  2. New HP Laptop works much slower than older gateway

  3. Vista SP1 Boots *much* slower than pre-SP1: why?

  4. Vista MUCH slower than XPSP2 - How can we change the TCP limits??

  5. Vista Copy Speed over the network is slower that XP SP2 and OSX..much slower?

  6. Vista Copy Speed over the network is slower that XP SP2 and OSX..much slower?

  7. W2003 FC LUNS - need to connect to LUNS from new machine without p

Loading...