On 2/20/07, Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 02/20 12:39 , Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: > > All my clients are servers with fast connections. I'll take > > MaxBackups down to 1 then. > > I haven't done any thorough empirical testing on this, but I suspect that > MaxBackups=2 would give you higher throughput overall (tho not > individually). the reason is that the processor and disk are going to have > idle moments (unless they're very slow, or memory is very limited), where > they're waiting on data from the remote end. So if you have two jobs > running, you'll be more likely to always have a job ready to use resources > as they become available. > > really, you'll have to test with your specific environment; but that's just > my experience and thinking.
In my experience I've found that setting MaxBackups to 1-2 normally results in the best behavior. When backing up clients across a WAN, more than 2 often simply saturates the network. When backing up local clients, you only want one more backup running than CPUs and disks. The more CPUs, disk spindles and network bandwidth you have, the more you can bump up the number of concurrent backups. Without presenting and undue load on the backup server or network. As Carl mentions, monitoring system utilization using top & sar is key to maximizing throughput. -Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
