Timothy writes:
I'm trying to set up BackupPC 3.0beta3 on a brand new installation of
CentOS 3.8. Here's what I've done:
1) Install a minimal installation of CentOS 3.8. I know that there are
other modules I will need, but it's not relevant for this error.
2) Unpack BackupPC 3.0beta3
Tom Nats wrote:
Here is my command line:
Running: /usr/bin/ssh -q -x -l root t10 /usr/bin/rsync --server --
sender
--numeric-ids --perms --owner --group -D --links --times
--block-size=2048 --recursive --ignore-times . /home/tn/testbackup/
The server rsync version: rsync version 2.6.4
El 30/12/2006 15:34, Diaz Rodriguez, Eduardo escribió :
Do you have other error too, the path don't will don't run because
you must use the small from (less of 8 chars) for windows
- please use MYDOCS~1 for path. and the firts thest use a short form
of short path C:/temp for example
-
El 05/09/2006 7:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió :
Hallo,
we use the cygwin-rsyncd.
On some machines the users describe a slow machine
while the rsyncd process is running.
On my machine with cygwin installed I added
nice to lower process priority of rsyncd successfully
by changing
Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/09/2007 01:45:10 AM:
Timothy J. Massey wrote:
Actually, the sluggishness comes from I/O competition, I think, not
RAM
or even CPU usage...
What kind of disk do you have and are you sure it is using DMA?
What does 'hdparm -T -t' show for the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/09/2007
03:32:56 AM:
Timothy writes:
Error loading BackupPC::FileZIO: Too many arguments for
Encode::decode_utf8 at lib/BackupPC/FileZIO.pm line 252, near 0)
Compilation failed in require at (eval 17) line 2.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at (eval 17)
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 15:28 -0500, Timothy J. Massey wrote:
I guess the best way to improve this would be to avoid rsync...
However, I like rsyncd. I never realized how heavy the overhead is with
rsync, though. Unless I'm missing something?
Thoughts?
There is quite a bit of overhead on
Sorry, I'm not great at deciphering linux diagnostics (I'm relatively
new to it--a year or two), but I did a little poking around to see what
might be causing trouble. Wikipedia had these choice bits to say about
the C3 chip design:
C3
* Because memory performance is the limiting
I am in the process of upgrading my computers from Fedora Core 5 to Core 6
(actually K12LTSP5--6).
I want to install BackupPC version 3.0 and I want to copy the configuration
and backup information I already have.
My /var/lib/BackupPC directory is on a separate hard drive. I want to use
the new
On 1/9/07, Timothy J. Massey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, it seems to me that the culprit is rsync. I think the reason my
production backup servers are usually at 100% CPU utilization is that
they're backing up reasonably high-performance file servers that have
enough CPU power to max out my
Jason Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/09/2007 04:32:06 PM:
Sorry, I'm not great at deciphering linux diagnostics (I'm
relatively new to it--a year or two), but I did a little poking
around to see what might be causing trouble. Wikipedia had these
choice bits to say about the C3 chip
On 01/09 04:58 , Timothy J. Massey wrote:
The C3 is slow. I get it. I already *knew* that. However, the
performance numbers I posted demonstrate pretty clearly that the failure
is not in a simple lack of CPU power, but in truly how *much* CPU power
rsync demands. I get triple the
Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/09/2007 04:15:31 PM:
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 15:28 -0500, Timothy J. Massey wrote:
I guess the best way to improve this would be to avoid rsync...
However, I like rsyncd. I never realized how heavy the overhead is
with
rsync, though. Unless
On Jan 9, 2007, at 2:11 PM, Timothy J. Massey wrote:
I would *love* to know if someone *is* getting substantially more than
3MB/s using rsync. What is the processing power of both machines?
Does 7.48 MB/s count?
Backup server is:
CPU: 2 x Intel Xeon 5030 Dual-Core 2.66GHz, EM64T, 2MB
Timothy J. Massey wrote:
The C3 is slow. I get it. I already *knew* that. However, the
performance numbers I posted demonstrate pretty clearly that the
failure is not in a simple lack of CPU power, but in truly how *much*
CPU power rsync demands. I get triple the performance in
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 17:11 -0500, Timothy J. Massey wrote:
I don't use compression. The fewer layers in my backup strategy the
better: and disk space is cheap! :)
Yes, but the disk is the most likely place to get an error and a
smaller compressed file thus has less risk... Fast CPU's
Rob writes:
I have been successful using BackupPC_serverMesg backup HOSTIP HOSTNAME 0
command to perform backups at the command line. Can I use
BackupPC_serverMesg to initiate a restore operation? If so, what is the
syntax of the command? I am guessing it would be:
BackupPC_serverMesg
Matthias writes:
For the last 4 weeks, I have been doing everything I could to try to
move our current backuppc pool (Pool is 79.18GB comprising 1132632 files
and 4369 directories) from a RAID0 to a RAID5 having different
filesystem sizes.
The operating system is OpenBSD, so the
Ed writes:
Connected to edcomp:873, remote version 29
Connected to module documents
Sending args: --server --sender --numeric-ids --perms --owner --group
--devices$
fileListReceive() failed
Done: 0 files, 0 bytes
Got fatal error during xfer (fileListReceive failed)
Backup aborted
Tom writes:
Running: /usr/bin/ssh -q -x -l root t10 /usr/bin/rsync --server --sender
--numeric-ids --perms --owner --group -D --links --times
--block-size=2048 --recursive --ignore-times . /home/tn/testbackup/
The server rsync version: rsync version 2.6.4 protocol version 29
The client
20 matches
Mail list logo
