Just to compare...

- WinNT:

100 Mbit - WinNT - Softwarecompression on:
  Elapsed time:           22 hours 18 mins 59 secs
  Priority:               10
  FD Files Written:       491,857
  SD Files Written:       491,857
  FD Bytes Written:       63,212,054,059 (63.21 GB)
  SD Bytes Written:       63,306,976,878 (63.30 GB)
  Rate:                   786.8 KB/s
  Software Compression:   20.5 %

100 Mbit - WinNT - Softwarecompression off:
  Elapsed time:           7 hours 5 mins 48 secs
  Priority:               10
  FD Files Written:       1,033,514
  SD Files Written:       1,033,514
  FD Bytes Written:       79,445,260,675 (79.44 GB)
  SD Bytes Written:       79,647,974,813 (79.64 GB)
  Rate:                   3109.6 KB/s
  Software Compression:   None

1 Gbit - WinNT - Softwarecompression off:
  Elapsed time:           1 hour 11 mins 27 secs
  Priority:               10
  FD Files Written:       25,617
  SD Files Written:       25,617
  FD Bytes Written:       55,405,933,941 (55.40 GB)
  SD Bytes Written:       55,410,583,111 (55.41 GB)
  Rate:                   12924.2 KB/s
  Software Compression:   None

- GNU/Linux:

100 Mbit - GNU/Linux - Softwarecompression off:
  Elapsed time:           43 mins 10 secs
  Priority:               10
  FD Files Written:       215,510
  SD Files Written:       215,510
  FD Bytes Written:       6,528,135,744 (6.528 GB)
  SD Bytes Written:       6,555,801,428 (6.555 GB)
  Rate:                   2520.5 KB/s
  Software Compression:   None

100 Mbit - GNU/Linux - Softwarecompression off:
  Elapsed time:           1 hour 30 mins 55 secs
  Priority:               10
  FD Files Written:       511,287
  SD Files Written:       511,287
  FD Bytes Written:       20,947,838,035 (20.94 GB)
  SD Bytes Written:       21,015,778,383 (21.01 GB)
  Rate:                   3840.1 KB/s
  Software Compression:   None

100 Mbit - GNU/Linux - Softwarecompression off:
  Elapsed time:           28 mins 29 secs
  Priority:               10
  FD Files Written:       102,827
  SD Files Written:       102,827
  FD Bytes Written:       9,016,608,291 (9.016 GB)
  SD Bytes Written:       9,028,880,430 (9.028 GB)
  Rate:                   5276.0 KB/s
  Software Compression:   None

100 Mbit - GNU/Linux - Softwarecompression off: 
  Elapsed time:           8 hours 31 mins 26 secs
  Priority:               10
  FD Files Written:       1,451,207
  SD Files Written:       1,451,207
  FD Bytes Written:       218,156,684,422 (218.1 GB)
  SD Bytes Written:       218,427,602,980 (218.4 GB)
  Rate:                   7109.3 KB/s
  Software Compression:   None

100 Mbit - GNU/Linux - Softwarecompression off: 
  Elapsed time:           1 hour 32 mins 49 secs
  Priority:               10
  FD Files Written:       340,154
  SD Files Written:       340,154
  FD Bytes Written:       43,356,482,859 (43.35 GB)
  SD Bytes Written:       43,400,247,377 (43.40 GB)
  Rate:                   7785.3 KB/s
  Software Compression:   None



Greetings,
User100


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im 
> Auftrag von Peter Eisch
> Gesendet: Montag, 11. Dezember 2006 03:06
> An: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Betreff: Re: [Bacula-users] Windows backup to network speed issues
> 
> 
> 
> Kern wrote:
> > This problem has been reported many times in the past, and 
> every case that I
> > know of has boiled down to either a switch set in 
> half-duplex mode, or a bad
> > Win32 ethernet card (i.e. hardware/firmware problems on the 
> card itself).
> > The Win32 chapter of the manual documents a few of these problems.
> 
> Hi, I'm the LAN admin to Brian's servers.  In an effort to 
> remove the LAN,
> the switch, the NICs and their respective configurations let me add:
> 
>  - He can scp large files at a rate at 8M/sec from the w2k3 
> (NTFS) system to
> the server where the bacula peak has yet to reach a rate of 0.6M/sec.
> 
>  - I put linux (centos 4.4, ext3) on the same config blade he 
> has in the
> same chassis that runs over the same LAN.  That system ran 
> over 8M/sec to do
> a full backup.
> 
> We see the same performance on other systems from 2.8GHz HT 
> Xeons to core 2
> duo's.  Using non-windows on the same hardware nets a 10x increase in
> performance.
> 
> The w2k3 system isn't cpu bound and is otherwise idle and yet 
> 15G backups
> take 10 hours and reports a rate of 416K/s.
> 
> Can anyone offer system configuration information with stats 
> of what it
> takes to back up their win/ntfs systems?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the 
> chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge
&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Reply via email to