Joe Konecny wrote:
FreeBSD 5.2.1, Amanda 2.4.4p2
Had to do the first real amrecover today and it was
painfully slow. I am using indexing and the file
to recover was about 140K. It took from 14:47 to
16:22. Any tips? Here is a link to the debug file
if anyone wants to look at it... (It's about
Paul Bijnens wrote:
snip
Different possibilities.
First make sure the network is not in the way (e.g. a duplex
mismatch on one of the switches, frequent mistake).
I'm backing up the server with the tape drive in it.
Then, do you have amrecover_do_fsf yes in the configuration?
If not, then amanda
Joe Konecny wrote:
Paul Bijnens wrote:
Next, how large is the image itself. If the dump file is 30 Gbyte
then it still takes some time to crawl through that amount to locate
your 140K file. A tape device is a sequential device. Indexing
with amanda does not turn it into a random access device.
Paul Bijnens wrote:
snip
Common misconcepton. Amanda actually only schedules and manages
the backup, but the backup itself is done by another program,
dump or gnutar or smbclient currently. You run into limitations
of the dump/restore programs (supplied by the OS).
Dump or restore does not have
FreeBSD 5.2.1, Amanda 2.4.4p2
Had to do the first real amrecover today and it was
painfully slow. I am using indexing and the file
to recover was about 140K. It took from 14:47 to
16:22. Any tips? Here is a link to the debug file
if anyone wants to look at it... (It's about 500K)
