Re: [Bacula-users] Restores via bat version browser very slow.
Gary R. Schmidt wrote: > I think I'll hold off updating for a bit longer. Sigh. I have just discovered the issue of bat being unusably slow restoring on 5.0.X is known about by the developers and is being worked on. Regards, Richard -- ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Restores via bat version browser very slow.
Gary R. Schmidt wrote: > I think I'll hold off updating for a bit longer. Sigh. Another bat bug I have just discovered going from 3.0.3 to 5.0.2, is mounting tapes in an autochanger from the command window: bat output in console pane: mount Select Storage resource (1-3): Automatically selected Catalog: MyCatalog Enter autochanger slot: 7 7: is an invalid command. Using bconsole works fine. Regards, Richard -- ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Restores via bat version browser very slow.
On Wed, May 12, 2010 13:56, Richard Scobie wrote: > I installed 3.0.3 a month or so prior to 5.0.0 being released, with a > view to using bat for restores, as it made life much easier for > commandline-phobes, and it performed very well. > > It was then updated to 5.0.1 and restores of anything more than a > handfull of files became unusably slow. I noted all the discussion from > others seeing similar effects which largely seemed to be caused by extra > mysql indexes having been added - something I had not done. Incorrect > mysql tuning was also blamed. > > I then saw a comment by someone who said that it was slow in bat but OK > using bconsole and I have just completed the following tests: [SNIP] I haven't yet upgraded to 5.x (frankly the problem level is too high for my liking) and am still on 3.0.3, Solaris 10, CoolStack MySQL 5.1.30 64-bit, carefully munged bacula configure script to compile 64-bit DIR/SD/FD and use shared libraries. I built a 32-bit bat using the bacula-supplied Qt, (again modifying configure to use it). Running DB/SD/DIR on the same box, I ran bat and set up a restore all of ~100,000 files, it took maybe a second for each phase. I think I'll hold off updating for a bit longer. Sigh. Cheers, GaryB-) -- ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
[Bacula-users] Restores via bat version browser very slow.
I installed 3.0.3 a month or so prior to 5.0.0 being released, with a view to using bat for restores, as it made life much easier for commandline-phobes, and it performed very well. It was then updated to 5.0.1 and restores of anything more than a handfull of files became unusably slow. I noted all the discussion from others seeing similar effects which largely seemed to be caused by extra mysql indexes having been added - something I had not done. Incorrect mysql tuning was also blamed. I then saw a comment by someone who said that it was slow in bat but OK using bconsole and I have just completed the following tests: The director is on the same machine as the mysql database - a default, untuned Fedora 11 mysql 5.1.37. Using bat from a Gb connected machine to restore a tree containing 72,684 files, the progress bar on the GUI takes two minutes to complete Stage 1 -"Processing Checked Directories". Stage 2 - "Filling Database Table" takes about 80 minutes. During this mysql resource usage on the database machine is less than 1% CPU and RAM and bat resource usage is moderate. Switching to bconsole on the Gb connected machine and restoring the same job, it takes about 1 second at the "Building directory tree" stage and 0.5 second at the "72,684 files marked" stage. While I did not spend a lot of time on 3.0.3, I am quitre sure this problem was not apparent then. Regards, Richard -- ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
