Dear Thorsten
That's a rate I wish I had! :-)
I use a P3 800 MHz. It's a 9.0 SuSE Kernel 2.4.21.
Dir, FD, SD on this machine, as well as 5 other FDs via Network.
There was no change in hardware / network structure whatsoever since I changed from the old backup-software to bacula.
SD uses up to 45% CPU. Load average is 0.44.
Perhaps I might add that I have 5 other Bacula DIR installations, too, on very different hardware which also have a local FD as well as FDs on the network.
Up to now, throughput wasn't that critical.
But I have seen today, that they all do almost the same rates (3 - 5 MB/s).
So I think it must have something to do with bacula's configuration. (Which mostly is the defaults, concerning the throughput respect)
Any ideas?
BTW: Thanks for your answer!
i. A. Christoff Buch
=====================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+49.941.78004.607
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OneVision Software AG
Dr.-Leo-Ritter-Str. 9
D - 93049 Regensburg
| "Thorsten Engel"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 16.06.2006 21:30 |
|
Dear Christoff,
I reached 17MB/s on a brand new linux server (xeon, fd,dir and sd on 1
machine). I surely can say that the current fd on win32 is not optimal
(using almost 100% of the cpu). The next release will include an optimized
version. What OS are you using? How much cpu is bacula consuming when a
backup is running?
Best,
thorsten
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
_______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
