Diference between SCP and bacula goes from 15 min with bacula and 3 min with scp. I suspect it's some database problem. Im using postgresql 7.4.8. Maybe with Sqlite will increase the rates? Must I try with them?
MaxxAtWork escribió: > On 8/23/07, Angel Mieres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Im testing bacula with two jobs. One of them, backup over 70.000 files >> and have 2 Gb. Second one have over 100 files and have 1Gb. >> Why the first job is getting speed of 3.000 KB/sec and the second one >> 25.000 KB/sec?(the backup is to a file on both cases) >> Have bacula less performance with small files? >> >> > > Although my guess would be also oabout some database related hits, > did you try to accomplish (just for testing purposes :) the same file copy > via scp or ftp, so to check whether disk I/O or network bottlenecks can be > responsible for the issue? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
