>>>>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 13:59:34 -0600, May, John said: > > As far as I know it was running at about 70MB/s. It could have been > shoe-shining a bit though, not really sure.
600GB at 70MB/s would only take 2.5 hours so it can't have been getting that at a sustained rate. Shoe-shining sounds like a real possibility. > -John > > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Simmons [mailto:mar...@lispworks.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 1:26 PM > To: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula 5.0.2 restore files from tape very slow > >>>>> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 07:50:41 -0600, May, John said: > > > > Monday morning, 3 days later and it is still restoring. It's finished about > > 600GB, which is less than half of what is on the two tapes. I'm pretty sure > > that only one job was written to the tape at the time of backup. Also, I > > thought 'bextract' would be faster than a normal restore, since I'm telling > > it restore everything on tape, and not just individual jobs. Is there > > anyway I can speed this up? Next up is an 8TB restore, and I dread to think > > how long that will take. > > Do you know how the tape drive was functioning during the restore? Was it > continually repositioning the tape (shoe-shining)? That would happen if > Bacula (or the target filesystem) was unable to keep up with the speed at > which the drive was sending data. > > __Martin > > > > > > John > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: May, John [mailto:john....@fugrohorizons.com] > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 7:52 AM > > To: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > > Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula 5.0.2 restore files from tape very slow > > > > >Hi John... Is it possible that the backup job you are trying to restore > > >from > > >was running at the same time as other backup jobs were running (eg: > > >concurrent > > >jobs enabled)? > > > > > >If yes, then what might be going on here is that several jobs from several > > >clients were written to the tape at the same time, and the data from each > > >job > > >was "interleaved", so the write to tape during the backup was fast, but > > >now > > >the trade-off is that restores will be slow since the tape drive needs to > > >read > > >parts of the files it wants to restore, skip the files from other > > >servers/jobs, lather, rinse, repeat. > > > > > >It could also explain the initial fast restore of some data as it is > > >possible > > >that this particular backup job you are trying to restore was "already in > > >progress" when the other started so it had full access to the storage and > > >it > > >was the only one writing to the tape. > > > > > >Something to consider. > > > > Well, this was an archive job and I ran it during the day when no other > > backups were running. Also, I have Bacula configured to only write a > > single job to each tape for the archive pool (Maximum Volume Jobs = 1). > > > > John > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bill Arlofski [mailto:waa-bac...@revpol.com] > > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 7:06 PM > > To: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > > Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula 5.0.2 restore files from tape very slow > > > > On 07/15/10 14:07, May, John wrote: > > > I am using Bacula 5.0.2 using MySQL on Centos 5.4 x64. I'm trying to > > > restore some files from a backup I made a couple months ago. I the > > > restore is about 1.5 TB in size and spans two LTO4 tapes. I can start > > > the restore just fine and the first 5GB flies by in a minute or so, then > > > the restore sort of stalls and starts crawling. It slows down to about > > > 1MB/s down from about 70MB/s. There are only about 15,000 files on the > > > tapes and I am restoring to a local Raid 0 array. > > > > > > I tried to bextract the files with and without a bootstrap file and the > > > speed is still very slow. I also verified I have the correct the indexes > > > in Mysql and I compacted the database. > > > > > > At this rate, I don't think the restore will finish, because it is going > > > so slow. > > > > > > Any ideas on what's going on? > > > > > > -- John > > > > > > Hi John... Is it possible that the backup job you are trying to restore from > > was running at the same time as other backup jobs were running (eg: > > concurrent > > jobs enabled)? > > > > If yes, then what might be going on here is that several jobs from several > > clients were written to the tape at the same time, and the data from each > > job > > was "interleaved", so the write to tape during the backup was fast, but now > > the trade-off is that restores will be slow since the tape drive needs to > > read > > parts of the files it wants to restore, skip the files from other > > servers/jobs, lather, rinse, repeat. > > > > It could also explain the initial fast restore of some data as it is > > possible > > that this particular backup job you are trying to restore was "already in > > progress" when the other started so it had full access to the storage and it > > was the only one writing to the tape. > > > > Something to consider. > > > > -- > > Bill Arlofski > > Reverse Polarity, LLC > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint > > What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? > > Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first > > _______________________________________________ > > Bacula-users mailing list > > Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint > > What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? > > Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first > > _______________________________________________ > > Bacula-users mailing list > > Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint > > What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? > > Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first > > _______________________________________________ > > Bacula-users mailing list > > Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint > What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? > Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first > _______________________________________________ > Bacula-users mailing list > Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint > What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? > Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first > _______________________________________________ > Bacula-users mailing list > Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
