Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install
2009-09-02 12:35:42
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 12:24:09PM -0400, Jon Craig wrote:
> > I tried renicing everything:
> >
> > jeward@kw157:/usr/share/backuppc/bin$ head -2 BackupPC_nightly
> > #!/usr/bin/perl
> > setpriority(0, $$, -20);
> >
> > jeward@kw157:/usr/share/backuppc/bin$ head -2 BackupPC_dump
> > #!/usr/bin/perl
> > setpriority(0, $$, 20);
> >
>
> I believe that BackupPC_nightly is running as "backuppc" user and as
> such can only reduce it priority (ie +20), not lower (ie -20). Also,
> you should check that the sub-processes to see if they properly
> inherited this change. My guess is it will still not have much affect
> as your most likely IO bound and priority affects scheduling on the
> processor, but doesn't prioritize IO.
It might be worth a try to use ionice as well and have either the
nightly or the dump set to idle priority (ionice -c3 -p$pid)
Tino.
--
"What we nourish flourishes." - "Was wir nähren erblüht."
www.lichtkreis-chemnitz.de
www.craniosacralzentrum.de
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, (continued)
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Tino Schwarze
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, James Ward
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Jon Craig
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install,
Tino Schwarze <=
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, James Ward
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, James Ward
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Tino Schwarze
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Holger Parplies
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Les Mikesell
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Craig Barratt
Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Craig Barratt
|
|
|