Marc Schiffbauer wrote: > * Chris Howells schrieb am 10.09.07 um 16:47 Uhr: > >> Arno Lehmann wrote: >> >> Thanks for your reply. >> >> >>> I'd suggest to do some tests with Bacula, and after you found your >>> best settings, clearly mark all tapes with their respective block sizes. >>> >> Will do. >> >> Are you basically suggesting that I should use the following sd directives: >> >> Minimum Block Size = nnn >> Maximum Block Size = nnn >> >> I am *slightly* concerned about operating the drive in fixed block mode, >> given the dire warnings in the manual. >> > > The manual says that nnn being the same number for both settings > means "fixed" blocksize. > > As I understand it, your solutions should be to just set the > "Minimum Block Size" so you get a good perfromance. > > Minimum Block Size = 1048576 > > won't this "fix" your performance? > How would this affect restores from older tapes?
Althougth I'm "only" using LTO2 at the moment, this is of interest to me as well because there are clear bottlenecks showing up where the tape drive isn't running quite as fast as it should be with the default 64 k blocking size - especially on highly compressible data like logfiles and database dumps. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
