Hi,

Does anybody have experience with those USB 2.0 hard drive enclosures? Do
they really transfer at ~400MB/sec?

What's a more realistic transfer rate? Is this a good choice for backing
up data instead of tapes, if I have around 100GB to back up?

Compatible with the Win2003 backup tool?

Thanks,

Do

The bottle neck or limiting factor is the hard disk itself which can not transfer at that
rate.
Even Ultra320 SCSI at burst speeds can't reach that speed.

Hard disks are faster than tape and if Win2003 can see the hard disk, so should the backup
software.

Dave



"Do" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
| Hi,
|
| Does anybody have experience with those USB 2.0 hard drive enclosures? Do
| they really transfer at ~400MB/sec?
|
| What's a more realistic transfer rate? Is this a good choice for backing
| up data instead of tapes, if I have around 100GB to back up?
|
| Compatible with the Win2003 backup tool?
|
| Thanks,
|
| Do
|
|

I am using 200GB exteranls with Firewire to make backups of verious
networked machines for off site storage. They accept the data as fast as a
100mb network connect can give it.

"Do" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi,
>
> Does anybody have experience with those USB 2.0 hard drive enclosures?
Do
> they really transfer at ~400MB/sec?
>
> What's a more realistic transfer rate? Is this a good choice for
backing
> up data instead of tapes, if I have around 100GB to back up?
>
> Compatible with the Win2003 backup tool?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Do
>
>

Seat of the pants says you are achieving about 8 megabytes per sec for
your 100Mb system. usb is 480Mbit so 40-50 MB a second would be reasonable.

Jlmc wrote:

> I am using 200GB exteranls with Firewire to make backups of verious
> networked machines for off site storage. They accept the data as fast as a
> 100mb network connect can give it.
>
> "Do" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>Hi,
>>
>> Does anybody have experience with those USB 2.0 hard drive enclosures?
>>
> Do
>
>>they really transfer at ~400MB/sec?
>>
>> What's a more realistic transfer rate? Is this a good choice for
>>
> backing
>
>>up data instead of tapes, if I have around 100GB to back up?
>>
>> Compatible with the Win2003 backup tool?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Do
>>
>>
>>
>
>