Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Configuring autochanger with SAS LTO-5 drives

2017-06-23 09:54:04
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Configuring autochanger with SAS LTO-5 drives
From: Cejka Rudolf <cejkar AT fit.vutbr DOT cz>
To: Ivan Adzhubey <iadzhubey AT rics.bwh.harvard DOT edu>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 15:53:04 +0200
Cejka Rudolf wrote (2017/06/05):
> Cejka Rudolf wrote (2017/06/02):
> > Ivan Adzhubey wrote (2017/06/01):
> > > b) What is the effect of MaximumFileSize option and what would be its 
> > > optimal 
> > > value for my IBM LTO-5 SAS drives? I have used 8GB value found in one of 
> > > the 
> > > list posts, while the documentation suggests 2GB for LTO-4. But even set 
> > > at 
> > > 8GB this would create lots of EOF marks on a 1.5TB tape, do we really 
> > > need so 
> > > many?
> > 
> > Hi, I do use 16 GB. Every EOF mark means around 3 seconds delay. So if you 
> > have
> > over 200 files on the tape using 8 GB, it is around 10 minutes extra per 
> > tape.
> 
> Hi, small fix. It seems that it is even around 5-6 seconds delay resulting in
> extra 20 minutes per tape. And worse, I'm afraid that the tape drive do not
> stop nor slowdown tape movement, which would mean over 10 % of the tape lost
> because of filemarks. Hope that I'm wrong.

Hi, I finally have done and finished real testing with Maximum File Size option.
Tested on LTO-6 drive with LTO-5 tape, so the results are relevant for LTO-5,
used btape utility and fill s (simplified) command.

Fortunately, I has negligible impact on tape capacity, but unfortunately, I has
really dramatical impact on overall write speed and you have to count not just 
5-6
seconds, but better 8-10 seconds per file. I also added time to read one file at
140 MB/s, which is important for seeking during restores.

  File   Simplified   Simplified           Bytes     Files   Rough time to
  size    fill time    fill rate         written   written   read one file

  1 GB      6:44:18    61.8 MB/s   1498688192512      1499       00:00:07
  2 GB      4:51:30    85.7 MB/s   1498737278976       750       00:00:14
  4 GB      3:54:57   106.3 MB/s   1498762641408       375       00:00:29
  8 GB      3:24:22   122.2 MB/s   1499224932352       188       00:00:57
 16 GB      3:11:09   130.7 MB/s   1499456405504        94       00:01:54
 32 GB      3:04:35   135.4 MB/s   1499690303488        47       00:03:49
 64 GB      3:01:17   137.8 MB/s   1499574960128        24       00:07:37
128 GB      2:59:37   139.1 MB/s   1499603664896        12       00:15:14

And it seems that the results are perfectly reproducible. Three successive
tests with 16 GB file size have had exactly the same fill time 3:11:09!
Tests were done by mistake, when I wondered how it is possible that the
time stays exactly the same :o)

Regards.

-- 
Rudolf Cejka <cejkar at fit.vutbr.cz> http://www.fit.vutbr.cz/~cejkar
Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Information Technology
Bozetechova 2, 612 66  Brno, Czech Republic

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users


ADSM.ORG Privacy and Data Security by https://kimlaw.us