On 8/23/07, Angel Mieres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Im testing bacula with two jobs. One of them, backup over 70.000 files > and have 2 Gb. Second one have over 100 files and have 1Gb. > Why the first job is getting speed of 3.000 KB/sec and the second one > 25.000 KB/sec?(the backup is to a file on both cases) > Have bacula less performance with small files? > Is everything on one single server and on the same harddrive / raid array?
The first thought is that the biggest reason for the difference in backup rates is that in the case of the small files your harddrive/array is doing significantly more seeking than in the case with a few large files and depending on how they are on your media file readahead cache may be working against you. Have you timed the same backups using tar? It should be shorter than with bacula but does it have a similar ratio? John ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
