Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-10-08 Thread Arno Lehmann
Hi, 07.10.2007 20:19,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > A full backup of the offending directory just ran in 7 hrs, 17 min with > a rate of 160KB/s (1,416,688 files, 4.4GB SD bytes written). This is > slightly more files and bytes than last month. > > This is almost twice as fast as previous performance (1

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-10-07 Thread Ross Boylan
A full backup of the offending directory just ran in 7 hrs, 17 min with a rate of 160KB/s (1,416,688 files, 4.4GB SD bytes written). This is slightly more files and bytes than last month. This is almost twice as fast as previous performance (13 hrs, 14 min and a rate of 86KB/s). This suggests th

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-10-06 Thread Arno Lehmann
Hello, 06.10.2007 00:21,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > Here are the results after moving the postgres database to another disk: > Initial jobs were like the ones at the end of my earlier report, > involving the directories with c 4,000 files. > 93 seconds first try (277kb/s) > 20 seconds 2nd try (1679kb/

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-10-05 Thread Ross Boylan
On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 18:57 -0400, Steve Thompson wrote: > On Wed, 26 Sep 2007, Ross Boylan wrote: > > > I've been having really slow backups (13 hours) when I backup a large > > mail spool. I've attached a run report. There are about 1.4M files > > with a compressed size of 4G. I get much bett

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-10-05 Thread Steve Thompson
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007, Ross Boylan wrote: > I've been having really slow backups (13 hours) when I backup a large > mail spool. I've attached a run report. There are about 1.4M files > with a compressed size of 4G. I get much better throughput (e.g., > 2,000KB/s vs 86KB/s for this job!) with othe

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-10-05 Thread Ross Boylan
Here are the results after moving the postgres database to another disk: Initial jobs were like the ones at the end of my earlier report, involving the directories with c 4,000 files. 93 seconds first try (277kb/s) 20 seconds 2nd try (1679kb/s) Then I switched to the one I used at the beginning of

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-10-04 Thread Arno Lehmann
Hi, 04.10.2007 00:30,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 23:19 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: >> Hello, >> >> 30.09.2007 01:36,, Ross Boylan wrote:: >>> On Sat, 2007-09-29 at 13:15 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 08:46 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: > Hello, > >

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-10-03 Thread Ross Boylan
On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 23:19 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: > Hello, > > 30.09.2007 01:36,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > > On Sat, 2007-09-29 at 13:15 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: > >> On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 08:46 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> 27.09.2007 22:47,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > On

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-09-30 Thread Arno Lehmann
Hello, 30.09.2007 01:36,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > On Sat, 2007-09-29 at 13:15 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: >> On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 08:46 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> 27.09.2007 22:47,, Ross Boylan wrote:: On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 09:19 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: > Hi, >

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-09-29 Thread Ross Boylan
On Sat, 2007-09-29 at 13:15 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: > On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 08:46 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: > > Hello, > > > > 27.09.2007 22:47,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > > > On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 09:19 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> 27.09.2007 01:17,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > >

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-09-29 Thread Ross Boylan
On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 08:46 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: > Hello, > > 27.09.2007 22:47,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > > On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 09:19 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> 27.09.2007 01:17,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > >>> I've been having really slow backups (13 hours) when I backup a larg

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-09-27 Thread Arno Lehmann
Hello, 27.09.2007 22:47,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 09:19 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> 27.09.2007 01:17,, Ross Boylan wrote:: >>> I've been having really slow backups (13 hours) when I backup a large >>> mail spool. I've attached a run report. There are about 1.4M fi

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-09-27 Thread Ross Boylan
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 09:19 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote: > Hi, > > 27.09.2007 01:17,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > > I've been having really slow backups (13 hours) when I backup a large > > mail spool. I've attached a run report. There are about 1.4M files > > with a compressed size of 4G. I get much b

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-09-27 Thread Ross Boylan
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 21:26 -0500, Drew Bentley wrote: > On 9/26/07, Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've been having really slow backups (13 hours) when I backup a large > > mail spool. I've attached a run report. There are about 1.4M files > > with a compressed size of 4G. I get muc

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-09-27 Thread Arno Lehmann
Hi, 27.09.2007 01:17,, Ross Boylan wrote:: > I've been having really slow backups (13 hours) when I backup a large > mail spool. I've attached a run report. There are about 1.4M files > with a compressed size of 4G. I get much better throughput (e.g., > 2,000KB/s vs 86KB/s for this job!) with o

Re: [Bacula-users] painfully slow backups

2007-09-26 Thread Drew Bentley
On 9/26/07, Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been having really slow backups (13 hours) when I backup a large > mail spool. I've attached a run report. There are about 1.4M files > with a compressed size of 4G. I get much better throughput (e.g., > 2,000KB/s vs 86KB/s for this job!)