Re: [Bacula-users] NFS or bacula-fd, which one is faster?
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Ivan Adzhubey wrote: I have a Linux NFS fileserver which has to be backed up to a bacula server on another Linux box. The fileserver in question exports everything that's needed to be backed up so all files are actually accessible on bacula server via NFS as well. Should I run my backups via a remote bacula-fd client on the fileserver or via local client on the bacula box (reading from NFS-mounted tree) On the fileserver, definitely. , which method do you think will work with faster data transfers? I can try both and benchmark them of course but would appreciate if anyone done a similar setup already and can share experience. Bacula client to fileserver will be faster, less error-prone and less prone to permissions problems. Bacula backups of remote-mounted filesystems should only be attempted as a last resort. - 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
[Bacula-users] NFS or bacula-fd, which one is faster?
Hi, I have a Linux NFS fileserver which has to be backed up to a bacula server on another Linux box. The fileserver in question exports everything that's needed to be backed up so all files are actually accessible on bacula server via NFS as well. Should I run my backups via a remote bacula-fd client on the fileserver or via local client on the bacula box (reading from NFS-mounted tree), which method do you think will work with faster data transfers? I can try both and benchmark them of course but would appreciate if anyone done a similar setup already and can share experience. Thanks, Ivan The information transmitted in this electronic communication is intended only for the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this information in error, please contact the Compliance HelpLine at 800-856-1983 and properly dispose of this information. - 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
Re: [Bacula-users] NFS or bacula-fd, which one is faster?
In response to Ivan Adzhubey [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, I have a Linux NFS fileserver which has to be backed up to a bacula server on another Linux box. The fileserver in question exports everything that's needed to be backed up so all files are actually accessible on bacula server via NFS as well. Should I run my backups via a remote bacula-fd client on the fileserver or via local client on the bacula box (reading from NFS-mounted tree), which method do you think will work with faster data transfers? I can try both and benchmark them of course but would appreciate if anyone done a similar setup already and can share experience. It's going to depend on where resources are most available. If you run the FD on the NFS server, it will use CPU to do the compression, but will use less network bandwith. If you run the FD on the bacula server and pull the data via NFS, the Bacula server will use all the CPU to compress but more network traffic will be necessary to pull the uncompressed files through NFS. Also, if you use NFS you won't be able to take advantage of things such as filesystem snapshots. Also, depending on your NFS export settings, you may hit permissions problems. So which is best depends on which of those tradeoffs is most important to you. Also, whether or not you actually use software compression will change the balance. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com - 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
