IHi Ryan
ts because the data is being transferred twice, once from client to the
spool area , then again from the spool area to $TAPE. From a backup
point of view, its taken longer to backup the same amount of data.
What would be nice is two separate values, one for spool data rate and
one for write-to-device data rate.
Steve
Ryan Novosielski wrote:
So, I have switched to spooling, on the advice I've seen written
recently... sounds like the way to go, especially if you only have one
tape drive. I expected a speed increase too, as the drive would be used
more efficiently. What I did not expect is the 1000Kps speed DECREASE.
Can anyone tell me why this might be? This is a Solaris 9, Sun UE450
box, 3x296 with a DAT72 drive.
Here are the stats:
No spooling:
Scheduled time: 30-Jan-2006 18:04:06
Start time: 30-Jan-2006 18:04:11
End time: 30-Jan-2006 18:09:12
Priority: 10
FD Files Written: 20,102
SD Files Written: 20,102
FD Bytes Written: 846,587,164
SD Bytes Written: 849,703,073
Rate: 2812.6 KB/s
Spooling
Scheduled time: 30-Jan-2006 23:59:09
Start time: 30-Jan-2006 23:59:13
End time: 31-Jan-2006 00:06:57
Priority: 10
FD Files Written: 20,102
SD Files Written: 20,102
FD Bytes Written: 846,587,164
SD Bytes Written: 849,703,073
Rate: 1824.5 KB/s
This can't be network speed, as it is spooled. The only thing I'm
thinking is that the disk could be THAT slow? Doesn't seem likely. The
disk and tape are not likely to be on the same controller. Any tips?
Thanks!
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
