Hi, 07.10.2007 20:19,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > A full backup of the offending directory just ran in 7 hrs, 17 min with > a rate of 160KB/s (1,416,688 files, 4.4GB SD bytes written). This is > slightly more files and bytes than last month. > > This is almost twice as fast as previous performance (13 hrs, 14 min and > a rate of 86KB/s). This suggests that the upgrade to a newer version of > bacula and/or the newer version of postgres made quite a difference.
That's a noticeable improvement. > The backup continued to use the same disk for the catalog and the source > of the files being backed up. Well, not the perfect solution, but this didn't seem to be your bottleneck. > Of course, this is still pretty bad. Yup - my Pentium 233 with 100MBit and DLT4000 is faster :-) > I'm asking on the ext3 list for > ideas. I wish you success there - and please keep us informed of your progress! Arno > > Ross > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 -- Arno Lehmann IT-Service Lehmann www.its-lehmann.de ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
