Joseph L. Casale wrote:
>> Are dir also running on this machine ?
>
> Nope.
>
>> So perharps the db config is too low ( default conf tend to be friendly with
>> hardware resources )
>> and if batch-insert is enable, bacula write the batch table also in /tmp so
>> there's concurrency on the sam
>Are dir also running on this machine ?
Nope.
>So perharps the db config is too low ( default conf tend to be friendly with
>hardware resources )
>and if batch-insert is enable, bacula write the batch table also in /tmp so
>there's concurrency on the same drive.
Reading up on this in the manua
Joseph L. Casale wrote:
>> cpu high on sd ? Did you use a soft raid ( level 5 ? )
>> or wrong params for the fs .
>
> No raid, actually this was a test box setup with a kickstart file
> using /tmp as the device location. Bizzare...
> jlc
>
Are dir also running on this machine ?
So perharps the d
>cpu high on sd ? Did you use a soft raid ( level 5 ? )
>or wrong params for the fs .
No raid, actually this was a test box setup with a kickstart file
using /tmp as the device location. Bizzare...
jlc
--
Let Crystal Repo
Joseph L. Casale wrote:
>> no, in sense of configuration. this is a known limitation of gzip
>> compression. if you're on LAN (gigabit) you might wan't to disable it if
>> you backup to tape (use tapes hardware compression) or if you backup to
>> file, use a compressed filesystem (maybe: http://mii
>no, in sense of configuration. this is a known limitation of gzip
>compression. if you're on LAN (gigabit) you might wan't to disable it if
>you backup to tape (use tapes hardware compression) or if you backup to
>file, use a compressed filesystem (maybe: http://miio.net/wordpress/
>projects/fusec
Thomas Mueller wrote:
>> GZIP and SHA1, speed averaged ~7800KB/s. No GZIP or SHA1, speed went up
>> to ~3KB/s
>>
>> Looking more closely at the FD, it appears to be single threaded and not
>> really utilize the cpu very aggressively either.
>>
>> Is there anything that can be done here to help?
> GZIP and SHA1, speed averaged ~7800KB/s. No GZIP or SHA1, speed went up
> to ~3KB/s
>
> Looking more closely at the FD, it appears to be single threaded and not
> really utilize the cpu very aggressively either.
>
> Is there anything that can be done here to help?
no, in sense of configur
> GZIP and SHA1, speed averaged ~7800KB/s. No GZIP or SHA1, speed went up
> to ~3KB/s
>
> Looking more closely at the FD, it appears to be single threaded and not
> really utilize the cpu very aggressively either.
>
> Is there anything that can be done here to help?
no, in sense of configur
I have several mixed clients all backing up to Linux and Solaris
SD's. The windows fileserver's are taking far too long, so in looking
at this, I noticed the cpu utilization on the Windows FD's isn't very
high but the SD are, why is that? Searching the forum showed compression
is done at the FD lev
--- On Tue, 11/18/08, Pascal Clermont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Pascal Clermont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Improving Backup speed
> To: "Dan Langille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Date
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Pascal Clermont
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> Currently spending a lot of time on improving the speeds of this network.
> After several tests I have realized that the database is "inserting
> attributes" was taking quite a lot of time. In order to improve this
Pascal Clermont wrote:
> Ok here is the steps I took that made me believe that I do not have libpq.a:
libpq.a is part of the postgresql-devel package.
--
Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu | For every problem, there is a solution that
WPI Senior Network Engineer | is simple, elegant, and wrong.
Dan Langille wrote:
> On Nov 17, 2008, at 4:03 PM, Pascal Clermont wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> Currently spending a lot of time on improving the speeds of this
>> network.
>> After several tests I have realized that the database is "inserting
>> attributes" was taking quite a lot of time. In order to imp
On Nov 17, 2008, at 4:03 PM, Pascal Clermont wrote:
> Hi,
> Currently spending a lot of time on improving the speeds of this
> network.
> After several tests I have realized that the database is "inserting
> attributes" was taking quite a lot of time. In order to improve this I
> have searched
Hi,
Currently spending a lot of time on improving the speeds of this network.
After several tests I have realized that the database is "inserting
attributes" was taking quite a lot of time. In order to improve this I
have searched your forums and see that using batch mode would increase
this act
16 matches
Mail list logo
