If you have one large partion of 350GB then there is not much you can do
with regards to parellaisim, this will only give you an advantage if you
have multiple partitions defined ie, raid1, raid2 raid3 raid4 then with
parallalism set to 4 it would back all four up simultaneously.

However depending on the type of raid you have you may get other issues
with access speeds etc if you break it up into multiple luns.

Of course the other issues you have to contend with is that this is a
mail server so sany changes are allways going to be problamatic, it may
be a long shot but you may want to look at your network traffic, during
the backup also do you perform your virus checking, spam filtering etc
on the same server.

Feel free to email me directly if you wish as we have an extensive mail
setup here, involving 6 machines.

Andrew

David De Maeyer wrote:

RAID is one big partition and parallelism is on 4 for the client. I
thought increasing the parallelism on the client.

David

___________________________________________________
David De Maeyer
Roskilde University Center, Department of Computer Science
Box 260, Hus 42.1, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark
voice (+45) 46 74 38 29 / fax (+45) 46 74 30 72




On 29 Apr 2004, at 14:19, agascoyn wrote:

Hi David

How is your raid setup.

Is it one big partition or groups of smaller partitions.

Also what is your parellalism set to currently.

Andrew Gascoyne

Data Backup / Recovery Administrator

David De Maeyer wrote:

Hi all!

We are facing a performance issue when taking a full backup of our
mail
server (>7000 users, 350 GB of data, running Debian linux).

The backup server has no problem with the other linux clients. It is
writing at around 100 KB/s... which is far from the 2 to 8 MB/s we are
used to have on the other clients.

It takes forever to backup all the user directories! And we simply
can't find where the bottleneck is... just that there are a lot of I/O
on the RAID on which these directories are stored.

Would it help to increase/decrease the parallelism for the client
and/or other clients (smaller filesystems)?

Does somebody on this mailing-list once faced a similar problem? Is
the
upgrade of the client on the mail server a must?

Regards,
David

server: NetWorker 7.1.1 (running Solaris 8)
client: NetWorker 6.1.1 (running Debian linux, IMAP server, 350 GB on
external RAID)

___________________________________________________
David De Maeyer
Roskilde University Center, Department of Computer Science
Box 260, Hus 42.1, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark
voice (+45) 46 74 38 29 / fax (+45) 46 74 30 72

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
Andrew Gascoyne
Unix Administrator
European Southern Observatory
Karl-Schwarzschild-Strasse 2
D-85748 Garching bei Muenchen

Phone: +49 89 32006443
Fax  : +49 89 32006380
EMail: agascoyn AT eso DOT org

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
Andrew Gascoyne
Unix Administrator
European Southern Observatory
Karl-Schwarzschild-Strasse 2
D-85748 Garching bei Muenchen

Phone: +49 89 32006443
Fax  : +49 89 32006380
EMail: agascoyn AT eso DOT org

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=