Les Mikesell wrote at about 12:22:31 -0600 on Thursday, February 3, 2011:
> On 2/3/2011 11:33 AM, Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote:
> > On 02/03 04:37 , John Goerzen wrote:
> >> Transferring it using rsync directly takes 13 minutes. And it has rsync
> >> at
> >> about 85% CPU usage instead of 9
Robin Lee Powell wrote at about 09:30:17 -0800 on Thursday, February 3, 2011:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 09:22:00AM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > OK, so the question becomes, how do I monitor for general backup
> > queue problems? I've had situations where something gets stuck,
> > like a
Les Mikesell gmail.com> writes:
>
> On 2/3/2011 11:33 AM, Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote:
>
> And worse for performance, on the server side it has to uncompress the
> copy to compute the block checksums unless you have enabled checksum
> caching and the file hasn't changed for two runs (maybe
On 2/3/2011 11:33 AM, Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote:
> On 02/03 04:37 , John Goerzen wrote:
>> Transferring it using rsync directly takes 13 minutes. And it has rsync at
>> about 85% CPU usage instead of 99%.
>
> Sounds like you're running into the fact that BackupPC doesn't actually use
> 'real'
On 02/03 04:37 , John Goerzen wrote:
> Transferring it using rsync directly takes 13 minutes. And it has rsync at
> about 85% CPU usage instead of 99%.
Sounds like you're running into the fact that BackupPC doesn't actually use
'real' rsync at both ends of the connection. It has a perl implementa
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 09:22:00AM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> OK, so the question becomes, how do I monitor for general backup
> queue problems? I've had situations where something gets stuck,
> like a nightly job, and the queue gets backed up, and I want to
> detect that.
>
> I guess if I
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 05:25:48PM +0100, Holger Parplies wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Robin Lee Powell wrote on 2011-02-02 08:12:47 -0800
> [[BackupPC-users] General questions about the background queue and
> link commands.]:
> > Let me ask some more general questions: What does the
> > background queue act
John Goerzen complete.org> writes:
>
> So I should add that additional testing shows that it was only the first full
> backup that was fast. Every subsequent backup, whether full or incremental,
> proceeded at the same very slow pace. rsync pegged at almost 100% CPU on the
> machine being back
Hi,
Robin Lee Powell wrote on 2011-02-02 08:12:47 -0800 [[BackupPC-users] General
questions about the background queue and link commands.]:
> Let me ask some more general questions: What does the background queue
> actually *mean*?
from the source (3.2.0beta0, but probably unchanged):
#- @
