Re: [Bacula-users] Postgres vs SQLite
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 08:40:51AM -0700, Tim Gustafson wrote: > I've used MySQL in the past, and Bacula is just apparently not > optimized for it (or vice-versa, I'm not sure which). We run a fairly > beefy MySQL server and we have hundreds of apps and web sites that all > use that server and all of them work extremely well but when we used > it for Bacula, the query that it used to build a list of files to > restore took *ages* - in some cases more than 24 hours, and in some > cases it never finished at all - for our data set. When we switched I like having one database server for serveral/almost all applications, however, I always have a seperate one for bacula. The bacula workload is different from most other database applications as is mainly writes. I'd personally go with postgres. Regards, Adrian -- LiHAS - Adrian Reyer - Hessenwiesenstraße 10 - D-70565 Stuttgart Fon: +49 (7 11) 78 28 50 90 - Fax: +49 (7 11) 78 28 50 91 Mail: li...@lihas.de - Web: http://lihas.de Linux, Netzwerke, Consulting & Support - USt-ID: DE 227 816 626 Stuttgart -- Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost. Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1 ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Postgres vs SQLite
On Wed 01 May 2013 10:40:51 am Tim Gustafson wrote: > > If you are backing up one machine with a small number of files then > > sqlite might be okay, but otherwise you'll probably find it will be a > > performance bottleneck for anything bigger. > > > > I recommend you go with postgresql (or mysql). > > I've used MySQL in the past, and Bacula is just apparently not > optimized for it (or vice-versa, I'm not sure which). We run a fairly > beefy MySQL server and we have hundreds of apps and web sites that all > use that server and all of them work extremely well but when we used > it for Bacula, the query that it used to build a list of files to > restore took *ages* - in some cases more than 24 hours, and in some > cases it never finished at all - for our data set. When we switched > to Postgres, that query went down to a few minutes. Our backup load > has changed significantly since then - we now use ZFS snapshots for > our multi-terabyte, multi-million-inode file systems and use Bacula > for our smaller VMs, none of which have more than a few tens of > thousands of files each. So maybe it's time to revisit using MySQL. > > I just really hate maintaining a whole database server for one > application, especially one as unwieldy as Postgres. Postgres > requires a fair amount of memory, and has some compatibility issues > with FreeBSD Jails (it requires you enable sysvipc for all jails, > which is something of a security concern). It's also "one more thing" > that I have to monitor. Tim, I run a small shop with a dozen systems (pc's & servers) and have been using SQLite for years with no performance problems. Like you, I have no other use for an industrial strength database server running constantly. FWIW, my backups all run around 2:00am when no one is working, so even if it is a little slower, the processing is complete before anyone arrives for work. My restores, also, likely would be faster with a faster database, but those are so infrequent as not to be a concern. Sincerely, cmr -- Debian "Squeeze" Registered Linux User #241964 To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. -- Thomas Jefferson -- -- Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost. Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1 ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Postgres vs SQLite
> If you are backing up one machine with a small number of files then sqlite > might be okay, but otherwise you'll probably find it will be a performance > bottleneck for anything bigger. > > I recommend you go with postgresql (or mysql). I've used MySQL in the past, and Bacula is just apparently not optimized for it (or vice-versa, I'm not sure which). We run a fairly beefy MySQL server and we have hundreds of apps and web sites that all use that server and all of them work extremely well but when we used it for Bacula, the query that it used to build a list of files to restore took *ages* - in some cases more than 24 hours, and in some cases it never finished at all - for our data set. When we switched to Postgres, that query went down to a few minutes. Our backup load has changed significantly since then - we now use ZFS snapshots for our multi-terabyte, multi-million-inode file systems and use Bacula for our smaller VMs, none of which have more than a few tens of thousands of files each. So maybe it's time to revisit using MySQL. I just really hate maintaining a whole database server for one application, especially one as unwieldy as Postgres. Postgres requires a fair amount of memory, and has some compatibility issues with FreeBSD Jails (it requires you enable sysvipc for all jails, which is something of a security concern). It's also "one more thing" that I have to monitor. -- Tim Gustafson t...@ucsc.edu 831-459-5354 Baskin Engineering, Room 313A -- Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost. Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1 ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Postgres vs SQLite
> Hi, > > I was wondering if there was any information about the performance > difference between running Bacula with a Postgres database vs an > SQLite database. I don't have any other need for a Postgres server, > so if I can get Bacula to perform as well with SQLite as it does with > Postgres, then I'd prefer to drop Postgres altogether. > If you are backing up one machine with a small number of files then sqlite might be okay, but otherwise you'll probably find it will be a performance bottleneck for anything bigger. I recommend you go with postgresql (or mysql). James -- Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost. Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1 ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
