> Using iperf I measured following performances :
> 
> bacula-fd = the windows server 2008 R2 host, 1Gb/sec NIC bacula-dir = a linux
> ubuntu 10.04 PC, 1 100Mb/sec NIC bacula-sd = a linux ubuntu 10.04 server, 1
> Gbite/sec NIC
> 
> 
> iperf server            iperf client                Performance
> ----------------            --------------- --------------------
> 
> bacula-fd                bacula-dir                10 MBytes/sec
> bacula-fd                bacula-sd                111 MBytes/sec
> bacula-dir                bacula-fd                10 MBytes/sec
> bacula-sd                bacula-fd                 26 MBytes/sec
> 
> So normally the bacula client should be able to write to the bacula storage at
> 26MBytes/sec ?
> 
> Any suggestions ?
> 

Any crappy computer made in the last 5 years should be able to saturate a 
gigabit link using iperf. The fact that you are only getting 26Mbytes/second 
fd->sd is a bit worrying... it's well above the 1Mbit/second that bacula 
appears to be limited to but it's still an indication of a major problem. I 
haven't had that much experience with Hyper-V for performance testing but it 
should be able to approach Xen which easily gets gigabit speeds for Windows 
VMs. Is your switch up to the job?

James


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users