Not saying there isn’t a performance issue here, but note that there will always be a bottleneck. No matter how much you tweak, something will always be slower. That said, are the speed of your backups for the amount of data that you are backing up and considering your source and destination and change-rate of your data, are you getting the performance you would expect? It can be misleading seeing a bottleneck when everything is working great, so aside from following the best practices to make sure everything is tweaked as it should, is the backup performance meeting your expectations, and meeting your needs?
I concur with @dloseke that there will always be a bottleneck no matter what solution you implement.
This used to drive me nuts until I finally came to accept it. Now instead i look at throughput speed, job completion time, backup failures and their cause to determine optimal performance with the hardware I have.
One last thought, everyone is always concerned about backup performance, but what about restore performance? Isn’t that where the boots hit the road?
I concur with @dloseke that there will always be a bottleneck no matter what solution you implement.
This used to drive me nuts until I finally came to accept it. Now instead i look at throughput speed, job completion time, backup failures and their cause to determine optimal performance with the hardware I have.
One last thought, everyone is always concerned about backup performance, but what about restore performance? Isn’t that where the boots hit the road?
100% agree… backups are made to be restored.
Hi @nattakit - I just wanted to follow up with you on your issue to see if you were able to resolve this and if so how? If it is resolved please mark a best answer which could include one you provide if none of the ones given have helped but you found another solution. Keep us posted if you need more help.