On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Richard Scobie <richard AT sauce.co DOT nz> 
wrote:
> skipunk wrote:
>>
>> After returning to my office this morning, I had found the server was 
>> connected to a 10/100 switch.  I had moved it to the rack and connected it 
>> to the switch 10/100/1000 and nic 1 pulls 1000 on ethtools
>> nic 2 pulls 100 on ethtools.
>>
>> After futher investigation, it looks like nic 2 is capped at 100 mb/s.
>>
>> Even running on 1 nic, my speeds have jumped up to a max of 8 Mb/s with an 
>> avg of 3 - 4 Mb/s when doing backups over the net.
>>
>> A little better but not where it should be.
>>
>> I'm at a loss for the moment.
>
> I think you mentioned in a previous post that writing a local, multi GB
> file to the drive went at full speed, so your drive is setup OK.
>
> Given it appears that the network is the bottleneck, you will need to
> copy all backup data to the machine local to the drive and then backup
> to tape.
>
> The setup in use here rsyncs remote machines to a fast local RAID5 and
> then bacula is used to tape from there.
>

Spooling with a 5 to 10GB spool file along with running multiple
concurrent jobs could help if the server can have at least 1 gigabit
link to the switch. Without that your backup jobs will likely take
days to complete.

John

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

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