> Using iperf I measured following performances : > > bacula-fd = the windows server 2008 R2 host, 1Gb/sec NIC bacula-dir = a linux > ubuntu 10.04 PC, 1 100Mb/sec NIC bacula-sd = a linux ubuntu 10.04 server, 1 > Gbite/sec NIC > > > iperf server iperf client Performance > ---------------- --------------- -------------------- > > bacula-fd bacula-dir 10 MBytes/sec > bacula-fd bacula-sd 111 MBytes/sec > bacula-dir bacula-fd 10 MBytes/sec > bacula-sd bacula-fd 26 MBytes/sec > > So normally the bacula client should be able to write to the bacula storage at > 26MBytes/sec ? > > Any suggestions ? >
Any crappy computer made in the last 5 years should be able to saturate a gigabit link using iperf. The fact that you are only getting 26Mbytes/second fd->sd is a bit worrying... it's well above the 1Mbit/second that bacula appears to be limited to but it's still an indication of a major problem. I haven't had that much experience with Hyper-V for performance testing but it should be able to approach Xen which easily gets gigabit speeds for Windows VMs. Is your switch up to the job? James ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
