On Thursday 30 November 2006 01:51 pm, Paul Lussier wrote: > It's not a SAN. It's direct-attached storage.
> > Winchester OpenSAN FC-based RAID array Isn't this the storage? I assume the description meant it was a SAN. What is the topology of that FC network? > In theory, yes, in practicality, no. Also, the backups are not > "touching the NFS server". > > Amanda connects to the amanda daemon on space-monster (via inetd) and > requests that he start his backup process. space-monster in turn > kicks off a gtar process which sends the data back to amanda. The > gtar process is reading the local disk, not NFS. Apparently, this > local disk I/O request supercedes NFS disk requests. But there's much > more than that happening here. CPU utilization is through the roof on > space-monster. That wasn't the case yesterday before the memory > upgrade. It sounds like the NFS server, space-monster in your description, is having to read all that data from the filesystem and send all that data to the backup server called amanda in your description. If you could put another server on the SAN, in the FC network, that machine could also mount the partition (read-only obviously) on the SAN and backup the contents without the space-monster even knowing anything is happening. -N _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
