Phil Stracchino wrote: > On 01/26/10 04:24, Ferdinando Pasqualetti wrote: > >> Hello Cyril, >> did you try using compression? Compression is done at client level, so, >> if you have CPU power, you could get higher throughput. >> In my eperience it is very hard to obtain a throughput higher than 50% >> of nominal capacity of the wire. >> > > I cannot share that experience unless you're using a hub rather than a > switch. > > Cyril, I would look at the load on all the machines involved, > particularly the machine running the catalog and Director. You also did > not specify what you're backing up to. > > I'm backing up a big amount of small files (yes, it's the worst case), it's the homedirs of the users.
We only use switchs. I tried iperf between the 2 servers, and it displays 89Mbit/s, so it's pretty good. The server running the catalog and the director doesn't use a particular amount of ressources during the backup process. Thanks. -- Cyril LAVIER | Systems Administrator | LTU Technologies 132 Rue de Rivoli - 75001 Paris France (tel) +33 (0)1 53 43 01 71 | (mail) clav...@ltutech.com LTU technologies - Making Sense of Visual Content | www.LTUtech.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
