On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 04:07:21PM -0700, David Rees wrote:
> On 9/27/07, Dan Pritts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So I've been of the opinion (not backed up by experimental data) that
> > a concatenation (what linux md driver calls LINEAR; similar effects can
> > be realized with LVM) of two RAID
On 9/27/07, Dan Pritts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I've been of the opinion (not backed up by experimental data) that
> a concatenation (what linux md driver calls LINEAR; similar effects can
> be realized with LVM) of two RAID1's would be better for BackupPC than
> a RAID10.
>
> My rationale f
On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 11:17:54AM -0700, David Rees wrote:
> Your BackupPC server's disk is completely maxed out. Looks like it is
> doing a lot of seeking. To get more throughput, you'll need more disk
> spindles. RAID1 will improve random read IO performance, but you'll
> need RAID10 w/4 disks w
On 9/26/07, Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Rees wrote:
> > Your machine looks fine to me. Your backuppc data partition is a single
> > disk?
>
> My servers disk it 6 250G IDE drives arranged in a RAID5 with 1 Hot
> Spare. The Controller is a 3Ware Escalade 7506-8 Controller.
OK,
I am testing with --checksum-seed=0 .. before I waste several hours, is
0 a useful number?
Thanks in advance,
Tony Nelson
Starpoint Solutions
David Rees wrote:
On 9/26/07, Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, due to a power failure, I was put in the lovely position of a
corrupted Reis
David Rees wrote:
On 9/26/07, Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, due to a power failure, I was put in the lovely position of a
corrupted ReiserFS tree. I ran reiserfsck, which took 4 days to
complete and just couldn't bring myself to trust stability of the disk.
Given the lack of in
On 9/26/07, Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, due to a power failure, I was put in the lovely position of a
> corrupted ReiserFS tree. I ran reiserfsck, which took 4 days to
> complete and just couldn't bring myself to trust stability of the disk.
Given the lack of interest/maintaine
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:28:31 -0400 Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Well, due to a power failure, I was put in the lovely position of a
> corrupted ReiserFS tree. I ran reiserfsck, which took 4 days to
> complete and just couldn't bring myself to trust stability of the
> disk.
>
> So,
On 09/26 10:28 , Tony Nelson wrote:
> It still seems very slow to me. I don't know if I should attribute it
> to the fact that everything it is doing is a full backup or not.
>
> I've attached the output from vmstat on the BackupPC server. The server
> is currently running 3 full backups.
I'v
On Thursday 20 September 2007 01:49:01 David Rees wrote:
> On 9/19/07, Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I looked into the checksum-seed option for rsync and it appears to a
> > patch that I don't have. I am using Gentoo and just installed rsync
> > from Portage. Has that patch every mad
On 9/19/07, Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Attached are the files you requested. The BackupPC server was running 2
> long running backups when I took these. In addition to the screenshots
> you requested, I added a screenshot from the web console of BackupPC.
>From your screenshots, the
On 9/19/07, Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I looked into the checksum-seed option for rsync and it appears to a
> patch that I don't have. I am using Gentoo and just installed rsync
> from Portage. Has that patch every made it into the rsync upstream?
Checksum seed support was added in
On 9/19/07, Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Rees wrote:
> > Your backup server is showing about 22% waiting on disk IO, how many
> > processors and what type of disk/filesystem is your backuppc data
> > partition on?
>
> The system has 2 dual core Xeon processors.
That's what I expe
Dave,
I looked into the checksum-seed option for rsync and it appears to a
patch that I don't have. I am using Gentoo and just installed rsync
from Portage. Has that patch every made it into the rsync upstream?
Thanks
Tony
Tony Nelson wrote:
David Rees wrote:
On 9/19/07, Tony Nelson <[EM
David Rees wrote:
On 9/19/07, Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Attached are the files you requested. The BackupPC server was running 2
long running backups when I took these. In addition to the screenshots
you requested, I added a screenshot from the web console of BackupPC.
From your s
On 9/18/07, Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I would like to do is figure out the best way of determining if the
> source of the slowness is the target server, the backuppc server or a
> network bottleneck that I just can't imagine.
Fire up `top` and `vmstat 3` on each machine while t
On 09/18 10:45 , Tony Nelson wrote:
> I have been using BackupPC very successfully for several years at
> several sites now. I'm presently having an issue with a few backups
> running very slowly and I'm looking for help troubleshooting the issue.
Have you tried doing the backup with tar? don'
Hi All,
I have been using BackupPC very successfully for several years at
several sites now. I'm presently having an issue with a few backups
running very slowly and I'm looking for help troubleshooting the issue.
BackupPC Server:
backuppc ~ # uname -a
Linux backuppc 2.6.18-gentoo-r2 #5 SMP
18 matches
Mail list logo
