On Fri, 19 Mar 2010, A Darren Dunham wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 05:46:53AM -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Yeah, just to clarify, it takes ~39-50 seconds to complete a run with ~40k
>> jobs on relatively old hardware.  OK then, have to wait for Symantec to
>> add an option to pull only the type of jobs, and to do that, they'd
>> probably need to put the job list in a DB.
>
> Does 'bpdbjobs -summary' run faster or for the same amount of time?  If
> it's faster, then they must have some sort of data structure to make it
> go fast already.  Or the slowdown isn't from running through all the
> jobs, it's from pulling the detail.  Either way, it wouild point to what
> could be a good speedup from a local filter.
>
> -- 
> Darren
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>

Hi,

Checking...
0.10user 0.01system 0:00.27elapsed 40%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k

However..
MASTER SERVER QUEUED REQUEUED ACTIVE SUCCESS PARTSUCC FAILED INCOMP SUSP 
WAITING_RETRY  TOTAL

There is not a way to differentiate on whether there are active restores :(

Thanks though.

Justin.

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu