On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM, John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com> 
wrote:
>> So do you believe these speeds of my backups are normal? I though my
>> Library tape with LTO-5 tapes could write at 140 MB/s approx. It isn't
>> possible to achieve higher speeds?
>
> You need to speed up your source filesystem to achieve better
> performance. Use raid10 or get a SSD. It has nothing at all to do with
> your tape or bacula speed if you hard drive can not read what it needs
> to backup at the maximum network speed. Or do not worry so much how
> much time a single backup is taking and enable concurrency and
> spooling. These will better utilize  the speed of your tape drive.
>
>
> John
>

strange!, I ran a hdparm test at the fileserver (the source of backup)
and I get a better performance:

[root@qsrpsfs1 ~]# hdparm -t /dev/mapper/mpath0

/dev/mapper/mpath0:
 Timing buffered disk reads:  622 MB in  3.00 seconds = 207.20 MB/sec

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software
The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network 
management toolset available today.  Delivers lowest initial 
acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users