Carlos Velasco wrote:
>> Robert Du Gaue wrote:
>>> I second this. Something like a LIMITBANDWIDTH keyword,
>>> specifically to prevent a link from being saturated. Either at the
>>> director level or storage level (too allow for links with dedicated
>>> nics full thru-put) Good suggestion.
>> There are many tools available to limit bandwidth. We are a backup
>> project. Let's leave network throttling to other projects. There
>> are many solutions, more than enough for each platform we support.
>>
>> We don't have enough coders to manage the existing list of features
>> let along take on tasks that are clearly outside the scope of
>> backups.
>
> Maybe you are right, although IMHO I wouldn't say that shaping traffic
> in an application that is very bandwidth demanding is outside the scope
> of it.
>
> I think it would be a nice feature for a wishlist :)
Bandwidth management is a network issue, not an application issue, IMHO.
If we had developers with time on their hands, *perhaps* it would be
feasible. But we do not have such idle developers.
The problem with implementing things such as this: we then have to
maintain them, fix bugs, deal with requests for tweaks and knobs.
Sorry, no. All that functionality has already been implemented in
network management tools specific to your OS. Why should we devote
precious and very scarce resources to duplicate tools? Please use the
existing tools and let the Bacula project concentrate on what it does
best: backups.
:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help
pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
|
