Re: [Bacula-users] LTO5 speed

2013-01-16 Thread f.staed...@dafuer.de
Hi, > one more thing to try is raising the readahead setting for your raid0 > device, if you haven't done that yet. If this happens to be a linux > server you could do this by echo 8192 > > /sys/block/md0/queue/readahead_kb for a software raid. If it's a > hardware raid, use the device name of tha

Re: [Bacula-users] LTO5 speed

2013-01-12 Thread Florian Heigl
Hey Frank, 2013/1/3 : > thank you all for your replies. I did some testing and set Maximum File > Size to 30GB now instead of the 1GB default. Now the drive sounds much > healthier. > >> from what i remember the manual recommends something like 2GB Maximum >> File Size for LTO2-3, so i guess LTO

Re: [Bacula-users] LTO5 speed

2013-01-03 Thread f . staedler
Hello, thank you all for your replies. I did some testing and set Maximum File Size to 30GB now instead of the 1GB default. Now the drive sounds much healthier. > from what i remember the manual recommends something like 2GB Maximum > File Size for LTO2-3, so i guess LTO5 would be served well w

Re: [Bacula-users] LTO5 speed

2013-01-03 Thread Cejka Rudolf
f.staed...@dafuer.de wrote (2013/01/02): > thanks for your quick answer. So the sound of the drive like starting > and stopping in about 10 second intervals are normal? Hi, no, it is not normal. Except that you have too small Maximum File Size setting. I have 8 GB, which means atleast one file pe

Re: [Bacula-users] LTO5 speed

2013-01-03 Thread Radosław Korzeniewski
Hello, 2013/1/3 > > Hello > > from what i remember the manual recommends something like 2GB Maximum > File Size for LTO2-3, so i guess LTO5 would be served well with 4GB. > > You can check a performance of different tape file size (EOF marks) using a btape utility. I found 8GB optimal for LTO5.

Re: [Bacula-users] LTO5 speed

2013-01-03 Thread lst_hoe02
Zitat von f.staed...@dafuer.de: > Hi Jesper, > >> Well, if you are sending uncompressible data, then above picture >> looks like a fully saturated LTO5-drive operating at optimal speed >> since the 140MB/s are for compressible data to the drive. > > thanks for your quick answer. So the sound of t

Re: [Bacula-users] LTO5 speed

2013-01-02 Thread f . staedler
Hi Jesper, > Well, if you are sending uncompressible data, then above picture > looks like a fully saturated LTO5-drive operating at optimal speed > since the 140MB/s are for compressible data to the drive. thanks for your quick answer. So the sound of the drive like starting and stopping in abo

Re: [Bacula-users] LTO5 speed

2013-01-02 Thread Jesper Krogh
On 02/01/13 16:12, f.staed...@dafuer.de wrote: > Is there anything wrong here? If I'm right about 140MB/s for an > LTO5 are quite ok since the data cannot be compressed. Well, if you are sending uncompressible data, then above picture looks like a fully saturated LTO5-drive operating at optimal

[Bacula-users] LTO5 speed

2013-01-02 Thread f . staedler
Hello, maybe a beginners question from me. I setup bacula and I'm very impressed about it. I have a LTO-5 drive and use data spooling to a 6x1TB RAID0 array before streaming to disk. But thoughput is maybe low. The drive writes while reading at 140MB from disk for 7-8 seconds, stops for 4-5 se