Re: [BackupPC-users] Pool size is small but disk is full

Ahh, what you suggested is exactly the problem. I moved the backup location to /mnt/backupfs. I've editing Lib.pm to the correct path now. Do you know if there's anything I need to do to fix up the existing backups? On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Andrew Grieve wrote: > Hmm, I see no errors i

Re: [BackupPC-users] Pool size is small but disk is full

Hmm, I see no errors in the backup logs, but I see this in the server log file: 2010-03-06 02:03:34 Running BackupPC_link z-drive-daily (pid=24405) 2010-03-06 02:03:34 z-drive-daily : mkdir /var/lib/backuppc/cpool/e: Permission denied at /usr/share/backuppc/lib/BackupPC/Lib.pm line 899 Probably

Re: [BackupPC-users] Pool size is small but disk is full

Andrew Grieve wrote: > I'm using reiserfs as my backup filesystem. > I'm running backuppc 3.1.0 on Ubuntu 10.4 > > The cgi interface tells me that "Pool is 45.65GB comprising 79452 files > and 4369 directories" > I've confirmed that running "du -s cpool/" yields 45 GB. > However, df tells me that

[BackupPC-users] Pool size is small but disk is full

I'm using reiserfs as my backup filesystem. I'm running backuppc 3.1.0 on Ubuntu 10.4 The cgi interface tells me that "Pool is 45.65GB comprising 79452 files and 4369 directories" I've confirmed that running "du -s cpool/" yields 45 GB. However, df tells me that the backup partition has 228 GB of

[BackupPC-users] issue with web interface in 3.1.0

We recently upgraded our Backuppc servers from Debian Etch to Lenny in response to the end-of-life for Etch. Etch was on the 2.1.x version of Backuppc.After the upgrade, everything *seemed* to be working - including the automated backups - until I needed to run a manual backup. Going to

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and lessfs

According to the author's site, it is still much slower than a native filesystem. As with any FUSE based filesystem, the copying of data from userspace to kernel and back adds enough latency to severely effect performance. Backuppc is extremely IO dependent on IO which is where FUSE is crippled.

Re: [BackupPC-users] high load and stuck processes

Oh, just as a reminder, you can do an external journal on ext3 and ext4 as well as xfs. On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 9:37 AM, dan wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Eric Persson wrote: > >> dan wrote: >> > If you are using EXT3 or XFS then I suggest you use an external journal. >> > get you

Re: [BackupPC-users] high load and stuck processes

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Eric Persson wrote: > dan wrote: > > If you are using EXT3 or XFS then I suggest you use an external journal. > > get yourself a small SSD or a small 15RPM disk. You could use a regular > > disk if you like but the faster the better. > > This would work with a fas

Re: [BackupPC-users] high load and stuck processes

dan wrote: > If you are using EXT3 or XFS then I suggest you use an external journal. > get yourself a small SSD or a small 15RPM disk. You could use a regular > disk if you like but the faster the better. This would work with a fast usbstick as well? With quite good results I expect, and not

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and lessfs

Gerald writes: > Has anybody looked into using BackupPC with lessfs? > http://www.lessfs.com Overall lessfs looks promising. Yes, I have looked into it, although I tested it with native rsync not BackupPC. I did some benchmarking of lessfs with rsync to get an idea of t