Author: "Thomas Smith" <thomathom AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:25:33 -0500
Hi, I'm running BackupPC 3.0.0 under Ubuntu. I'm having problems similar to the ones some people have had with 3.1.0 on XFS, but I also did some other odd things before this started happening, so I w
Hello Thomas, Did the BackupPC_nightly jobs take 22 hours on the 17th as well? If they didn't, I would suspect that since you restored the TopDir from a tarball, that the hardlinking wasn't handled c
Author: "Thomas Smith" <thomathom AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 14:05:55 -0500
Hi, No, it continues to take 22 hours or so each day. -Thomas -- http://resc.smugmug.com/ -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't ha
Author: Chris Robertson <crobertson AT gci DOT net>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:20:15 -0900
How is your XFS volume mounted? Did you add the "noatime" and "nodiratime" directives? If you have battery backed storage, I would highly recommend using "nobarrier" as well (http://oss.sgi.com/proje
Author: "Jeffrey J. Kosowsky" <backuppc AT kosowsky DOT org>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 18:27:05 -0500
Paul Mantz wrote at about 10:19:45 -0800 on Thursday, December 18, 2008: I don't think that BackupPC_nightly checks for hard link dups between the pc/ and pool/ directories. I believe that it only ch
Author: Adam Goryachev <mailinglists AT websitemanagers.com DOT au>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 10:56:44 +1100
I would advise that you confirm whether or not your hard links were restored properly: cd /var/lib/backuppc/pool/3/3/3 for file in `ls` do stat $file|grep Links|awk '{print $5" "$6}' done If they all
Author: Holger Parplies <wbppc AT parplies DOT de>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:33:44 +0100
Hi, Adam Goryachev wrote on 2008-12-19 10:56:44 +1100 [Re: [BackupPC-users] backuppc 3.0.0: another xfs problem?]: I fully agree on that point. Don't you trust shell globbing? ;-) You mean cd /var/li
Author: "Thomas Smith" <thomathom AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:15:45 -0500
Hi everyone, thanks for the help! Today around noon I remounted the backup disk with noatime, and then it only took another three hours, rather than another 10, which is exciting. I just remounted wi
Author: "Jeffrey J. Kosowsky" <backuppc AT kosowsky DOT org>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 00:58:20 -0500
Holger Parplies wrote at about 02:33:44 +0100 on Friday, December 19, 2008: Although I am in awe of Perl as much as the next guy, I prefer the following to quickly check for files with only 1 link: f
Author: "Thomas Smith" <thomathom AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 11:22:49 -0500
Hi again! I checked and most of the files have lots of hard links, so that's good. Today the nightly thing only took 10 hours, down from 14 down from 22. Other than the filesystem tweaks (noatime), i
If the disk usage is the same as before the pool, the issue isnt hardlinks not being maintained. I am not convinced that XFS is an ideal filesystem. I'm sure it has it's merits, but I have lost data
Author: Chris Robertson <crobertson AT gci DOT net>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:52:42 -0900
Creating or resizing (you do a proper fsck before and after resizing, don't you?) an ext3 filesystem greater than about 50GB is painful. The larger the filesystem, the more painful it gets. Having to
Creating or resizing (you do a proper fsck before and after resizing, don't you?) an ext3 filesystem greater than about 50GB is painful. The larger the filesystem, the more painful it gets. Having t
Creating or resizing (you do a proper fsck before and after resizing, don't you?) an ext3 filesystem greater than about 50GB is painful. The larger the filesystem, the more painful it gets. Having t
Author: Tino Schwarze <backuppc.lists AT tisc DOT de>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 20:10:27 +0100
I've lost data on reiserfs, but it's been a while ago. I've been using XFS for my BackupPC pool for about 2 years now and it's performance is okay (the pool used to be reiserfs). Since I also changed
I've lost data on reiserfs, but it's been a while ago. I've been using XFS for my BackupPC pool for about 2 years now and it's performance is okay (the pool used to be reiserfs). Since I also change
Author: "Thomas Smith" <thomathom AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 22:31:33 -0500
Hi, The server seems to be at a good level of performance now (1 hour and 45 minutes), thank you all for your help! Retrospective, for people coming across this thread later and wanting to fix backup
I guess that updatedb thing reinforces my arguement about not seeing any mixed load tests. ext3 handles these situations pretty good, maybe XFS does not... By the way, I read that EXT4 should allow f
Author: Chris Robertson <crobertson AT gci DOT net>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 14:14:36 -0900
Write barriers really harmed XFS performance on my setup (16 Seagate ES.2 spindles attached to an Adaptec 51645 utilizing hardware RAID6). iostat was showing a peak of 400 tps with barriers. Mounting
Write barriers really harmed XFS performance on my setup (16 Seagate ES.2 spindles attached to an Adaptec 51645 utilizing hardware RAID6). iostat was showing a peak of 400 tps with barriers. Mountin