In response to "Rainer Hackel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi all! > > I have bacula running (version 2.0.2) and in principle everything works = > fine. But now (reading some mails from the list) I ask myself why the = > backup-speed is that slow. In average it's about 1500 kb/s. > > The software is running on fedora. The Computer has a fast CPU and 2GB = of > RAM. No network backups, just lokal disk. The backup-drive is a lto-1 = hp. > > What backup-speed coult i expect? How could i find the bottleneck?
How fast are your disks/tapes? Are you backing up to tape or disk? Try some dd tests to see how fast you can transfer data raw. Use tar going from disk to tape to see how fast that runs, and/or use dd going from disk to disk. Frequently, in my experience, otherwise "fast" computers have slow (but reliable) hard drives in them. Since RAM is so cheap, you usually don't notice this until you're moving _lots_ of data around. >From there, you have to take into account that the DBMS has to write the catalog records, so you could run some tests to see how fast it can write new records to see if that's slowing you down. In my experience, CPU/memory are usually not the bottleneck when backups are running. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
