Hi, The server seems to be at a good level of performance now (1 hour and 45 minutes), thank you all for your help!
Retrospective, for people coming across this thread later and wanting to fix backuppc xfs performance problems: To fix this problem, I set the noatime and nodiratime options on the filesystem (I modified fstab and ran "mount -o remount,noatime,nodiratime /var/lib/backuppc"). This cut the time in half. I also noticed that updatedb was indexing the filesystem, and stopping this cut the time by a further 80%. Updatedb had been running under ext3, too, but hadn't slowed the FS down anywhere near as much. I switched to XFS because I thought I would be making archives a lot, then deleting them, and it took about 45 minutes to delete some of these files on ext3 (some of them are 400GB or so). But it turns out that I'm not doing this anyway, so if I had the chance I would switch back, since under the rest of the load conditions of backuppc, ext3 clearly performs better for me. Unfortunately, it takes 2 or 3 days to do this switch, so it might not happen for a while. Thanks again! -Thomas On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 2:47 PM, dan <danden...@gmail.com> wrote: > true enough. > > I have been doing a lot of expirimentation with opensolaris and zfs for > backuppc. It is a bit of a pain getting backuppc working on opensolaris, > specifically CPAN stuff. > > I am still in testing but ZFS seems to be an ideal filesystem for > backuppc. SUN claims that it is essentially bulletproof. I want to see for > myself. I am now running this test setup on 10 seagate sata 7200.11 disks > in a single pool. I turn on light compression using lzof to maintain > performance. This setup performs very very well and is in a raidz2 which is > similar to raid6. > > I still run ext3 on my primary backup server and wont be changeing that > unless ZFS works out or ext4,btfs,tux3 get to market and are stable. > > On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Tino Schwarze <backuppc.li...@tisc.de> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 10:13:08AM -0700, dan wrote: >> >> > If the disk usage is the same as before the pool, the issue isnt >> > hardlinks >> > not being maintained. I am not convinced that XFS is an ideal >> > filesystem. >> > I'm sure it has it's merits, but I have lost data on 3 filesystems ever, >> > FAT*, XFS and NTFS. I have never lost data on reiserfs3 or ext2,3. >> >> I've lost data on reiserfs, but it's been a while ago. I've been using >> XFS for my BackupPC pool for about 2 years now and it's performance is >> okay (the pool used to be reiserfs). Since I also changed hardware, I >> cannot compare 1:1. Perceived performance of XFS vs. reiserfs is about >> the same. >> >> > I say switch back to ext3. >> >> Which isn't that easy given a reasonably large BackuPC pool... >> >> Tino. >> >> -- >> "What we nourish flourishes." - "Was wir nähren erblüht." >> >> www.lichtkreis-chemnitz.de >> www.craniosacralzentrum.de >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> BackupPC-users mailing list >> BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net >> List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users >> Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net >> Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > BackupPC-users mailing list > BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net > List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users > Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net > Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/ > > -- http://resc.smugmug.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
