A Dimarts 27 Maig 2008, Shawn (Red Mop) va escriure:
> Paul pretty much covered everything I would say.   Don't do the compression
> settings, as they won't help enough to be worth it in this situation.
>
> "whole-file: 1" is how you tell dirvish to use --whole-file, it's in the
> dirvish.conf man page.
>
> Let us know if this helps, and good luck.

Thanks for all. Tomorrow I will see how it would be done.

Regards,

Leo

> Shawn
>
> On Tuesday 27 May 2008 08:21:11 am Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote:
> > A Dimarts 27 Maig 2008, Paul Slootman va escriure:
> > > On Mon 26 May 2008, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote:
> > > > I'm using dirvish 1.2.1-1, from a debian etch. I have created my
> > > > vaults and configured and running the complete system. I have a nfs
> > > > mount where I put the backup. It simply works.
> > >
> > > Rsync tries to optimize for network traffic, at a cost of increased
> > > local disk activity / CPU load.  If, however, you fool rsync by using
> > > an NFS mount, rsync thinks it's a local disk and will do the usual high
> > > disk activity which will severely load the NFS network link. It's
> > > always advised to not use rsync on NFS mounts.
> >
> > Ok,
> >
> > take note.
> >
> > > Additionally, such network disk boxes are usually quite limited in CPU.
> > > So even if it would be possible to run rsync natively on such a system,
> > > that would probably not perform very well either.
> >
> > I don't have rsync in that box ....
> >
> > > I would recommend using a simple USB / firewire box directly connected
> > > to the system being backupped; that performs at least an order of
> > > magnitude better than an NFS-connected drive, in my experience.
> >
> > Ok, but the box doesn't not have usb to connect a computer. So, I have
> > only the network option.
> >
> > > If you're stuck with the situation, you're best off using --whole-file
> > > as option to rsync. That means that rsync doesn't try to use the old
> > > version of the file to optimize the data transferred (reading the old
> > > file over NFS is already causing the data transferred to be 100%, even
> > > without the new data!).  Of course, if you have correctly entered the
> > > local hostname as the client name, then dirvish should automatically
> > > use --whole-file, but I don't see that in the ACTION: line you posted.
> > > What is the output of "uname -n" on that system? Is it "ris"?
> >
> > yes is ris.
> >
> > > If there is a large number of files in the backup, you could also
> > > disable the indexes to prevent a pass with find to get the list of
> > > files:
> > >
> > > index: none
> >
> > Ok, I hope they will not be needed.
> >
> > > > Howeber, I have a very poor transfer rate. To create the init backup
> > > > I need two days to transfer about 90G, and some days, if we have a
> > > > lot of
> > > >
> > > > Total file size: 130790723840 bytes
> > >
> > > This shows 130GB, not 90GB.
> >
> > yes, you are right. home 90G and conf, backup wiki, etc the rest.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Leo
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dirvish mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://www.dirvish.org/mailman/listinfo/dirvish
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dirvish mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.dirvish.org/mailman/listinfo/dirvish



-- 
--
Linux User 152692
PGP: 0xF944807E
Catalonia

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Dirvish mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.dirvish.org/mailman/listinfo/dirvish

Reply via email to