Thank you for all the replies
The bottleneck is the network or at lest something in the network
and yes I have an autoloader LTO4
If I use NC with a file of 10M I need 8 seconds to transfer
If I use scp I need around 2 seconds
The same file without compression
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:10 AM, John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com>
wrote:
>> Yes I am using a tape but should not be the tape
>> 07-Apr 00:36 angel-sd JobId 1443: Despooling elapsed time = 00:02:34,
>> Transfer rate = 75.16 M bytes/second
>>
>>
>> this is with a full backup
>>
>> FD Files Written: 2,878,988
>> SD Files Written: 2,878,988
>> FD Bytes Written: 248,635,057,283 (248.6 GB)
>> SD Bytes Written: 249,102,272,590 (249.1 GB)
>> Rate: 18745.1 KB/s
>>
>> On my mind I was hoping something around 30KB/s
>>
> You mean 30MB/s.
>
> I get 20 to 35MB/s for full backups with LTO2 from a raid5 array to a
> LTO2 autochanger that is not on the same machine as the raid.
>
> It looks like you have an LTO3 changer by the 75MB/s since that is a
> little low for LTO4 however you named the drive LTO4Driver so I assume
> its LTO4. I would expect despools of 100MB/s to 120MB/s for LTO4.
>
> I would first look to optimize your filesystem performance as this
> appears to be where the problem is. Is your spooling drive the same as
> your source data drive? That would kill performance.
>
> John
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
|
