Re: [Bacula-users] Mini-Status report
2014-11-25 14:24:38
Hello Ana,
Nice to hear from you :-)
On 11/25/2014 05:43 PM, Ana Emília M. Arruda wrote:
Hello
Kern,
Is
there any problem to set Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 1 in
Devices definition?
No, but if you have multiple disk devices that point to the same
directory, you will get a certain amount of disk fragmentation,
whereas if you allow Maximum Concurrent Jobs to be a bit higher (say
5), you will get interleaving of jobs but not disk fragmentation (it
probably works out to be roughly the same performance wise).
So, it is only a question of efficiency.
For tapes, see below ...
Setting
this directive to a higher value and, in the case of using
tape libraries, combined with data spooling for reducing data
interleave, should make our backups goes faster. But if
someone really don´t need that more than one job writes to one
tape and want to have no data interleave, is this
configuration a problem?
For tapes, Bacula will definitely run faster if you do data
spooling, and as you note it will reduce interleaving too. For best
performance try to have the fastest disks possible, perhaps with
some form of RAID (for speed) if you are writing to an LTO-5 or
LTO-6 drive.
If someone does not need more than one job writing to a tape and
wants no data interleaving, then setting Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 1
is the best solution.
Best regards,
Kern
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157005751&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
|
|
|