Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Quantum SuperLoader 3 under Bacula on FreeBSD 8

2010-05-18 10:05:21
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Quantum SuperLoader 3 under Bacula on FreeBSD 8
From: Robert Hartzell <bear AT rwhartzell DOT net>
To: bacula-users <Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 06:35:15 -0700
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 15:08 -0400, Paul Mather wrote:
> I am currently assembling a quote for an LTO-4 tape backup system.  So far, I 
> am looking at using a 16-slot Quantum SuperLoader 3 with LTO-4HH drive as the 
> tape unit.  Married to this will be a server to act as the backup server that 
> will drive the tape unit using Bacula to manage backups.  The server will be 
> a quad core X3440 system with 4 GB of RAM and four 1 TB SATA 7200 rpm hard 
> drives in a case that has room for eight hot-swap drives.  I plan on using 
> FreeBSD 8 on the system, using ZFS to raidz the drives together to provide 
> spool space for Bacula.  I will be using an Areca ARC-1300-4X PCIe SAS card 
> to interface with the tape drive.
> 
> My main question is this: is the Quantum SuperLoader 3 LTO-4 tape drive 
> supported by Bacula 5 on FreeBSD?  In particular, is the autoloader fully 
> supported?  The Bacula documentation indicates the SuperLoader works fully 
> under Bacula, though not explicitly whether under FreeBSD.
> 
> The backup server will serve a GigE network cluster of perhaps a dozen 
> machines with over 6 TB of storage, most of which is on the cluster's NFS 
> server.  Does anyone have good advice on sizing the spool/holding/disk pool 
> for a Bacula server?  Is it imperative to have enough disk space to hold a 
> full backup (i.e., 6 TB in this case), or is it sufficient to have enough 
> space to maintain streaming to tape?  (I don't have much experience of 
> Bacula, having used it only to back up to disk.)  In other words, do I need 
> more 1 TB drives in my backup server?
> 
> Finally, is 4 GB of RAM sufficient for good performance with ZFS?  Will ZFS 
> on FreeBSD be able to maintain full streaming speeds to tape, given the 
> various reports of I/O stalls under ZFS reported recently?

ZFS loves ram. More ram = better performance. I'm not at all familiar
with zfs performance on feebsd but zfs version 13 that's used on freebsd
8 is pretty old. ZFS is currently at version 22. 
I/O stalls? Is that a freebsd issue?





------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>