Jason Hughes wrote:
> Evren Yurtesen wrote:
>>> And, you could consider buying a faster drive, or one with a larger
>>> buffer. Some IDE drives have pathetically small buffers and slow
>>> rotation rates. That makes for a greater need for seeking, and worse
>>> seek performance.
>>
>> Well this is a seagate barracuda 7200rpm drive with 8mb cache ST3250824A
>> http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/manuals/ata/100389997c.pdf
>>
>> Perhaps it is not the maximum amount of cache one can have on a drive
>> but it is not that bad really.
>
> That drive should be more than adequate. Mine is a 5400rpm 2mb buffer
> clunker. Works fine.
> Are you running anything else on the backup server, besides BackupPC?
> What OS? What filesystem? How many files total?
FreeBSD, UFS2+softupdates, noatime.
There are 4 hosts that have been backed up, for a total of:
* 16 full backups of total size 72.16GB (prior to pooling and
compression),
* 24 incr backups of total size 13.45GB (prior to pooling and
compression).
# Pool is 17.08GB comprising 760528 files and 4369 directories (as of
3/27 05:54),
# Pool hashing gives 38 repeated files with longest chain 6,
# Nightly cleanup removed 10725 files of size 0.40GB (around 3/27 05:54),
# Pool file system was recently at 10% (3/27 07:16), today's max is 10%
(3/27 01:00) and yesterday's max was 10%.
Host User #Full Full Age (days) Full Size (GB)
Speed
(MB/s) #Incr Incr Age (days) Last Backup (days)
State
Last attempt
host1 4 5.4 3.88 0.22 6 0.4 0.4
idle idle
host2 4 5.4 2.10 0.06 6 0.4 0.4
idle idle
host3 4 5.4 7.57 0.14 6 0.4 0.4
idle idle
host4 4 5.4 5.56 0.10 6 0.4 0.4
idle idle
>> I read your posts about wifi etc. on forum. The processor is not the
>> problem however adding memory probably might help bufferwise. I think
>> this idea can actually work.:) thanks! I am seeing swapping problems
>> but the disk the swap is on is almost idle. The backup drive is
>> working all the time.
>
> Hmm. That's a separate disk, not a separate partition of the same disk,
> right? If it's just a separate partition, I'm not sure how well the OS
> will be able to allocate wait states to logical devices sharing the same
> physical media... in other words, what looks like waiting on ad2 may be
> waiting on ad0. Someone more familiar with device drivers and linux
> internals would have chime in here. I'm not an expert.
It is a separate disk. The disk is on FreeBSD not Linux. They are not
waiting for each other, they can be used simultaneously.
>>
>> I have to say that slow performance with BackupPC is a known problem.
>> I have heard it from several other people who are using BackupPC and
>> it is the #1 reason of changing to another backup program from what I
>> hear.
>>
>> Things must improve on this area.
>>
>
> I did quite a lot of research and found only one other program that was
> near my needs, and it was substantially slower due to encryption
> overhead, and didn't have a central pool to combine backup data. I may
> have missed an app out there, though. What are these people switching
> to, if you don't mind?
>
> Re: what must improve is more people helping Craig. He's doing it all
> for free. I think if it's important enough to have fixed, it's
> important enough to pay for. Or dive into the code and start making
> those changes. It is open source, after all.
I think we are already helping already by discussing the issue. Even if
we wanted to pay, there is nothing to pay yet, as there is no agreed
solution to this slowness.
Thanks,
Evren
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
