BackupPC-users

Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install

2009-09-01 12:50:14
Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install
From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com>
To: "General list for user discussion, questions and support" <backuppc-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net>
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 11:46:42 -0500
Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> Steve wrote at about 12:02:32 -0400 on Tuesday, September 1, 2009:
>  > Is there a parameter that sets priority of once backup over another,
>  > or do all the BackupPC_dump processes start at the same level?  Maybe
>  > that would be a $Conf that could be added...
>  > evets
> 
> That sounds like an interesting suggestion.
> 
> But for your purposes where it seems like you want to de-prioritize
> all dumps relative to BackupPC_nightly, maybe just alias the relevant
> commands in _InstallDir/bin to include the nice.
> 

I don't think priorities will make much difference.  This is much more 
about disk head position than CPU timeslices.  If the nightly process 
runs at all it's going to keep yanking the head away from where the 
backup runs want it to be.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
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/