BackupPC-users

Re: [BackupPC-users] Backuppc is Hammering My Clients

2012-01-31 19:12:00
Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] Backuppc is Hammering My Clients
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, 31 Jan 2012 18:10:36 -0600
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Kimball Larsen <quangdog AT gmail DOT com> 
wrote:
> We are a small office (6 employees) with a mixture of windows and mac 
> machines sitting on desks.  I have set up a server (Ubuntu linux) that has 
> been happily running backuppc for several years handling backups for all the 
> machines in the office with grace AND style.  We love it.
>
> However, in the last few months some of the users have noticed that when 
> backuppc is running a backup (incremental or full - does not seem to matter 
> which) it can have a serious impact to the performance of their local 
> machine.  Stuff comes to a crawl and they are nearly unable to work because 
> simple things like switching from one application to another starts to take 
> several seconds, etc.  The machine behaves like it is hammering swap space 
> and thrashing for memory.  At least one user reports this goes on for several 
> hours (and I confirmed that his latest incremental took 119 minutes to 
> complete).
>
> All the machines affected in this way are wired to the gigabit network (not 
> wireless), and I'm using rsync for the transfer method.  The users with the 
> complaints are all using OS X on late model high-end MacBook Pro laptops.
>
> Is there anything I can to to have the backups run in a more transparent 
> manner?  We are not all that concerned with speed of backup process - we're 
> all here all day anyway, so as long as everyone gets a backup at least once a 
> day we're happy.

Are you using any 'scan on access' type of virus protection?  That
would be odd for a Mac, but I think there are such things.  Do any
have local time machine backups that might be included?  Or
directories with very large numbers of files?   I think the rsync at
each end will keep a copy of the whole directory tree in memory while
both ends walk and compare contents. Normally this would be very fast
on incrementals where it doesn't do more than the directory check for
files that match but the list might be big enough to swap to disk.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
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>