On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Jason Voorhees <jvoorhees1 AT gmail DOT com> 
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 1:43 PM, John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com> 
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:38 PM, John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com> 
>> wrote:
>>>> /dev/mapper/mpath0:
>>>>  Timing buffered disk reads:  622 MB in  3.00 seconds = 207.20 MB/sec
>>>>
>>> That is a raid. But you still may not be able to sustain over 100MB/s
>>> of somewhat random reads. Remember that hdparm is only measuring
>>> sequential performance of large reads.
>>>
>>
>> If it is a raid I cold be wrong about the filesystem performance being
>> the only problem. You can test if this is the case by creating a
>> backup of a single file that is 1GB or so to media that is already
>> loaded and see if the performance is closer to the network maximum.
>> Maybe test an already compressed file of this size versus a file
>> containing all zeros.
>>
>> John
>>
>
> I tried to copy a 10 GB file between both servers (Bacula and
> Fileserver) with scp and I got a 48 MB/s speed transfer. Is this why
> my backups are always near to that speed?
>
It would be part of the problem.


-- 
John M. Drescher

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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