On 03/19 11:56 , Pedro M. S. Oliveira wrote:
> With the amount of data I reported and number of files I just have 6% of
> inodes occupied so I don't think that is really a problem, do you use XFS
> for any special purpose besides dynamic inode creation? 

The ability to be resized while mounted is good as well; tho I don't use it
much.
There may be a performance improvement over ext3; tho it's very hard to say.
(Backuppc is a fairly unusual load situation; and hard to benchmark well).
I've not noticed a performance problem from it.

I used to use reiserfs on backuppc installations; but after a couple of
years, some corruption bugs turned up which made me abandon it. I didn't
want to go back to the inode limitations of ext3 tho; so I went with XFS.

> Usually people tend to say processor is not important while backing up but

Backuppc will use all the processor, ram, and disk speed you give it. I've
not had a box where they weren't all pegged. I tend to limit concurrent
backups to 2; maybe 3 or 4 on a really high-end box (multiple processors and
a proven fast disk array); to control disk-head thrashing.

-- 
Carl Soderstrom
Systems Administrator
Real-Time Enterprises
www.real-time.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are
powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and
easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development
software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging.
Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:    http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/