In response to "Anders Boström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> gzip on this computer, on one CPU, reach about 18 Mbyte/s. bacula with > >> gzip only reach ~7.7 Mbyte/s. This leads me to believe that there are > >> room for improvement. > > BM> Again, the story changes. Above, you indicate that tar+gzip ran about > BM> 15% faster than bacula with gzip, which seems reasonable. Now you're > BM> saying that gzip is ~twice as fast as Bacula + gzip. Where did this new > BM> number come from? Are you taking in to account networking on this new > BM> test? > > If I state that "gzip on this computer, on one CPU, reach about 18 > Mbyte/s", I mean just that, nothing else. To clarify, this means that > pure gzip-performance on this computer, using just one gzip-process, > is 18 Mbyte/s.
If you would be kind enough to humor me ... Please create a file (or use an existing one) of notable size: few hundred meg. Put the file on the disk and time gzipping it. Run it 5 times. Create a memory filesystem and repeate the gzip tests with the file living on the mfs and the gzipped target existing on the mfs. I have a suspicion that your drives are the limiting factor in this. The above tests should confirm or deny that theory. -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
