Ralf Gross wrote:
>
>
> After all I've read, switching to rsync instead of tar doesn't seem to be a
> better choice.
After the 1st 2 fulls, rsync should be better if you have enabled checksum
caching. You do need plenty of RAM to hold the directory listing if you have a
large number of files.
> Disk I/O on the file server doesn't seem to be the bottleneck either. I can
> boost the disk I/O during backup with other tools (dd, cat, bonnie++) to more
> than 50 MB/s.
If you have a lot of small files, the access pattern and speed won't match
benchmark tests. And these days, 50 MB/s sounds kind of slow to deal with
terrabytes. Even with rsync you'll have to read all of the files on the target
side during full runs.
> Any ideas if I can tune my BackupPC settings to speed things up?
Throwing RAM at the server is likely to help.
--
Les Mikesell
[email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
[email protected]
List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
