I see no reason why the Windows bpipe plugin could not be released
to the community. If you would like please submit a "bug" request
for it. I don't promise anything though ...
On 3/1/19 5:34 PM, Wanderlei Huttel
wrote:
Hello Kern
Thanks for your answer!
About Windows clients.
I know that in the Enterprise version there is a bpipe
plugin for Windows.
Do you know if the bpipe plugin will be released for
community? And if it will be possible to escape the colons
(:)?
In firebird, for example is necessary to include the port
and how Bacula uses colon (:) as bpipe separator, it
breaks the plugin config,
Best regards
Wanderlei Hüttel
Hello Wanderlei,
Well, it is not known to me that the community Windows
client is not working as well as the Enterprise version.
Version 7.4.4 is very old, but since then the community
version has been brought up to date at least two times with
the Enterprise version.
There are still some more newer changes that have been made
in Enterprise version 10.2 that have not yet been backported
to the community (will be in the next batch),.
The installation files are a totally different question. If
someone knows about how the installer works, it would be a
big help if he/she would help cleanup the community
installation. It is particularly difficult to try to
backport the Enterprise installer because it has *so* many
plugins that are not available for the community -- and will
not be available for more time.
Yes, it would be helpful if some community member could help
with the community windows installer. There is nothing
second rate about the current community Windows binaries,
and they will be even better in the next few months.
Best regards,
Kern
On
3/1/19 3:26 PM, Wanderlei Huttel wrote:
Hello Kern
I know that this issue could have a
lot of possibilities, but it's known that the
community Windows client is not working fine as
Enterprise version 7.4.4 that was released to
the personal used in the past time. The
installation generate some trash files, the
bacula-fd.conf is not generated correctly.
I guess would be interesting give
more attention to the windows client
I've related a bug last year also and
still not have any return
http://bugs.bacula.org/view.php?id=2427
Thank you
Wanderlei
Hüttel
Hello,
I have noticed similar things. I have always
attributed the slower
speed on Windows due to the fact that Microsoft hired
the best students
from the best schools but most of them knew nothing
about programming
and programming history (in particular Unix), thus
these geniuses
re-invented the OS wheel in designing and building a
monolithic
operating system that took about 10 times as much code
as it took Unix
(and subsequently Linux). To me it is not surprising
that Windows had
more bugs than Linux (despite huge advances, it
probably still has more
bugs). In any case, programming Windows for a Linux
programmer is a
nightmare -- 10 times harder to do almost anything,
because there are
far more OS calls; they all have different arguments;
many of which are
not well or not at all document, ...
So, I have just attributed this to being normal
Windows inefficiencies.
Of course, the above is sort of a gut feeling.
Perhaps someone can do
some real performance testing and figure out what is
really going on.
Best regards,
Kern
On 2/28/19 8:22 PM, Peter Milesson wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm backing up 2 servers with Bacula, one with
Windows 2016, the other
> one with CentOS. The hardware is described below.
The Windows server
> is much more powerful than the Linux server in
all respects, and
> should theoretically deliver data to the Bacula
server at a much
> higher rate. But in reality, the Linux server
delivers data about 7
> times faster over the network, than the Windows
server.
>
> Is this completely normal, or should I start to
check up the Windows
> server for problems?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Peter
>
>
> Windows server (file server, RDP-server, Hyper-V
host with 2 very
> lightly loaded VMs)
>
=====================================================================
> Hardware: HP DL180 Gen9, Intel Xeon E5-2683v4,
48GB RAM, Smart Array
> P440 Controller, 6x SAS 1GB (7200 rpm, 12 Gb/s)
in RAID5
> Network: 2x 10GbE to HPE 1950 switch (LACP)
> OS: Windows 2016 (build 1607)
> Throughput to Bacula server: 23-Feb 08:52 MySd
JobId 991: Elapsed
> time=00:26:09, Transfer rate=4.071 M Bytes/second
>
>
> Linux server (plain file server with Samba)
> ==================================
> Hardware: HP DL120 Gen9, Intel Xeon E5-2603v3,
8GB RAM, HP Dynamic
> Smart Array B140i SATA Controller 2x SATA 2GB
(7200 rpm) in RAID1
> Network: 2x 1Gb to HPE 1950 switch (LACP)
> OS: CentOS Linux 7.5 (1804)
> Throughput to Bacula server: 23-Feb 08:26 MySd
JobId 990: Elapsed
> time=00:26:08, Transfer rate=28.29 M Bytes/second
>
>
> Bacula server
> ===========
> Hardware: standard motherboard with a 6-core AMD
FX-6300 CPU, 4xSATA
> 8GB (7200 rpm) in RAID10
> Network: Tehuti 10GbE NIC to ProCurve 2910al
switch
> OS: CentOS Linux 7.6 (1810)
> Bacula server throughput to the RAID array: ca.
60 Mbytes/second
>
> All switches are connected to our 10Gb/s optical
network backbone.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bacula-users mailing list
> Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
>
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
|
