I would think this relates more to normal behavior for a database restore. There are a few things that you may want to look into though. 1. Rather than splitting the the RDF devices, try putting just the database devices into Adaptive Disk Copy mode during the Restore. 2. There is a new feature introduced at 5772 called Single Round Trip (SiRT). This may be an option to speed things up.  SRDF with SiRT  SiRT (Single RoundTrip) for Fibre Channel SRDF directors (RFs) was introduced in Enginuity 5772 for SRDF/S mode only. It is dynamically enabled for SRDF/S links > 12 Km for block sizes up to 32K in Enginuity 5773 code. SiRT is compatible with fast write/write acceleration switches and extenders, as it will measure link latency and disable automatically if connected to these devices. As a best practice, it is recommended that either the EMC SiRT feature or the third-party fast write feature should be used. Both should not be enabled simultaneously. The Fibre Channel SiRT feature for the Fibre Channel director can be set to Off or Automatic. When set to Automatic, this feature will only accelerate write I/Os using criteria based on latency and I/O size. Note:  EMC recommends contacting your EMC Customer Service Representative to verify that the setting is enabled if required in your environment.     3. You may also need to investigate the size / utilization of your pipe between R1 and R2. 4. I do not think this has anything to do with the amount of Cache installed in the array. 5. I do recommend upgrading your microcode to the latest EMC Target levels.  Best Regards, TBM
Performance decrease with SRDF/S activated... -Distance between R1 site and R2 site is only 15KM.  We have restored a 200GB Database on R1 volumes with SRDF/S active (Synchronized) and it took 5 hours. The exact same restore on the same system with SRDF/S in Split mode took only 2h30.  I understand that Synchronous replication will always add some latency on IO/Writes but I don't undersand why it is so huge with a distance of only 15KM.  Could it be related to unsuficient cache, incompatible microcode version? Anybody would see an explanation or it is a normal behaviour?  R1 Symm Microcode: 5772.100  R2 Symm Microcode: 5773.138  Regards
Performance decrease with SRDF/S activated.