On 7/6/2011 12:31 PM, Jake Debord wrote:
I have a machine I back up that when done averages:
Elapsed time: 41 mins 47 secs
Priority: 1
FD Files Written: 6,948
SD Files Written: 6,948
FD Bytes Written: 14,587,852,350 (14.58 GB)
SD Bytes Written: 14,589,273,339 (14.58 GB)
Rate: 5818.8 KB/s
Software Compression: 11.7 %
Is this acceptable??? 6Mbps seems slow. I backup my machine and
achieve a little better results
Elapsed time: 3 mins 51 secs
Priority: 1
FD Files Written: 665
SD Files Written: 665
FD Bytes Written: 2,192,593,865 (2.192 GB)
SD Bytes Written: 2,192,728,783 (2.192 GB)
Rate: 9491.7 KB/s
Software Compression: 9.8 %
Both of our Machines are almost identical in specs. I'm just wondering if this
is typical or if there are tweeks to speeding things up. My setup is basically
out of the box so not much extra done to it.
I also use mysql for the database.
As others have suggested, this is entirely about client-side compression
speed. If those compression levels are typical, I'd recommend just
turning it off. Then you'll be limited by the lesser of disc and
network speed. Another possibility is to selectively disable
compression for certain file extension that are known to be already
highly compressed, such as JPG, ZIP, BZ2, etc. I get about 98MB/sec
throughput on a completely uncompressed backup of 80GB, and about
44MB/sec on a selectively compressed backup of around 1.2TB of data,
with a 3.85GHz i7 processor (net compression is about 21%, so 1TB is
stored).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable.
Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users