On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 10:59:08AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> >
> >no, i did not enable attribute spooling. i have disk space available. i
> >can enable
> >that and see if it helps.
>
> I've lost track of whether you are using tape or not, so this post may
> not be relevant.
>
> Another issu
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 09:54:57AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> >
> > slower at 12MB/s but still tolerable. the last started on christmas day,
> > birch:
> >
> > Job:birch.2007-12-25_16.47.08
> > Backup Level: Full
> > Client: "molbio-fd" 2.2.6
Michael Galloway wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 10:38:22AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
>> I meant to say: Bacula enables it by default. It relies upon the
>> PostgreSQL client having the thread safe option. See the above URL for
>> some detail.
>>
>> On a related issue: Are you spooling attrib
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 10:38:22AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
>
> I meant to say: Bacula enables it by default. It relies upon the
> PostgreSQL client having the thread safe option. See the above URL for
> some detail.
>
> On a related issue: Are you spooling attributes (Bacula feature)? See
Michael Galloway wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 10:29:36AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
>>> the db server is the bacula server, its postgres at:
>>>
>>> # /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres -V
>>> postgres (PostgreSQL) 8.2.5
>>>
>>> and i did not use the delay-insert feature. is there a reference url to
Michael Galloway wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 10:29:36AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
>>> the db server is the bacula server, its postgres at:
>>>
>>> # /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres -V
>>> postgres (PostgreSQL) 8.2.5
>>>
>>> and i did not use the delay-insert feature. is there a reference url to
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 10:29:36AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> >
> >the db server is the bacula server, its postgres at:
> >
> ># /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres -V
> >postgres (PostgreSQL) 8.2.5
> >
> >and i did not use the delay-insert feature. is there a reference url to
> >this? the load on thi
Michael Galloway wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 04:20:12PM +0100, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
>>> With the purpose of gathering facts: are these results repeatable?
>>>
>> In the same way of idea that Dan.
>>
>> This could be have to do with the database server having to much record to
>> store.
>> W
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 04:20:12PM +0100, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
>
> >
> > With the purpose of gathering facts: are these results repeatable?
> >
>
> In the same way of idea that Dan.
>
> This could be have to do with the database server having to much record to
> store.
> What and where are
>> not acceptable at 2MB/s. i cannot find any real difference in the network
>> config or nfs mount
>> config on these filesystms. i suspect it has to do with the nature of the
>> filesystems. masspec
>> has less than a millon files, aspen has around 8 million files and birch has
>> nearly 17 m
Michael Galloway wrote:
> happy new year all!
>
> my backups of network appliance nfs mounts has gotten intolerable. i have 3
> FAS250's
> i'm working with: masspec, birch, aspen. all are connected to the same switch
> via
> gigE network, with single hops to the bacula server (2.2.6 patched). fi
happy new year all!
my backups of network appliance nfs mounts has gotten intolerable. i have 3
FAS250's
i'm working with: masspec, birch, aspen. all are connected to the same switch
via
gigE network, with single hops to the bacula server (2.2.6 patched). first full
i did
was this one:
Job:
12 matches
Mail list logo
