Re: [Bacula-users] Postgres vs SQLite

2013-05-01 Thread Tim Gustafson
If you are backing up one machine with a small number of files then sqlite might be okay, but otherwise you'll probably find it will be a performance bottleneck for anything bigger. I recommend you go with postgresql (or mysql). I've used MySQL in the past, and Bacula is just apparently not

Re: [Bacula-users] Postgres vs SQLite

2013-05-01 Thread C M Reinehr
On Wed 01 May 2013 10:40:51 am Tim Gustafson wrote: If you are backing up one machine with a small number of files then sqlite might be okay, but otherwise you'll probably find it will be a performance bottleneck for anything bigger. I recommend you go with postgresql (or mysql).

Re: [Bacula-users] Postgres vs SQLite

2013-05-01 Thread Adrian Reyer
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 08:40:51AM -0700, Tim Gustafson wrote: I've used MySQL in the past, and Bacula is just apparently not optimized for it (or vice-versa, I'm not sure which). We run a fairly beefy MySQL server and we have hundreds of apps and web sites that all use that server and all of

[Bacula-users] Postgres vs SQLite

2013-04-30 Thread Tim Gustafson
Hi, I was wondering if there was any information about the performance difference between running Bacula with a Postgres database vs an SQLite database. I don't have any other need for a Postgres server, so if I can get Bacula to perform as well with SQLite as it does with Postgres, then I'd

Re: [Bacula-users] Postgres vs SQLite

2013-04-30 Thread James Harper
Hi, I was wondering if there was any information about the performance difference between running Bacula with a Postgres database vs an SQLite database. I don't have any other need for a Postgres server, so if I can get Bacula to perform as well with SQLite as it does with Postgres, then