Cesar Kawar wrote at about 07:33:52 +0100 on Sunday, March 13, 2011: > > > Enviado desde mi iPhone > > El 13/03/2011, a las 02:10, "Jeffrey J. Kosowsky" <backu...@kosowsky.org> > escribió: > > > Cesar Kawar wrote at about 23:07:53 +0100 on Friday, March 11, 2011: > >> > >> El 11/03/2011, a las 21:13, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky escribió: > >> > >>> Cesar Kawar wrote at about 18:27:34 +0100 on Friday, March 11, 2011: > >>>> > >>>> El 11/03/2011, a las 14:59, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky escribió: > >>>> > >>>>> Cesar Kawar wrote at about 10:08:10 +0100 on Friday, March 11, 2011: > >>>
> > Honestly, I am a bit confused because your ability to rsync a 1TB > > BackupPC archive in 2 hours seems to be at odds with the experience of > > just about everyone else that talks about rsyncs taking days or > > crashing on pools of just a few hundred gigabytes. And everybody else > > has talked about memory issues. Indeed, if a 1TB archive of 1 year of > > BackupPC data could be rsynced in 2 hours, I can almost guarantee that > > we never would have had hundreds of threads looking for better ways to > > backup a BackupPC archive. I would really love to understand why your > > experience seems to be so different from others. > > As i said before, it did't work for us eithdr with versions prior > to 3.0.2. With 2.6.9 we had all the problems that have been > described so many times. Core dumps, high memory utilization, > etc. Basically, it didn't work. I have been using 3.0.x (now 3.0.7) for a couple of years now and most people on the list have also been using a version of 3.0.x since it has been released 3 years ago. So, while 2.x had other memory issues, I don't think that explains why you are seeing lightning fast speeds while all of the rest of us are unable to get anything but very small BackupPC archives to rsync in a reasonable amount of time if at all. > > I've been following this list for a long time, even though i did never wrote > a mail to it until now, but i've read all the problems people were having to > replicate the pool. > > I even remember someone said that by installing backuppc on nexenta or open > solaris he'd been able to use built in zfs block level rsync like funtions > to sync the pool to another zfs based network machine. > > But all that was before rsync 3.0.2 which actually worked for us. I don't know - that has not been the common experience. If it were as simple as an upgrade to 3.0.x, surely the mailing list wouldn't still be filled with issues. > > We even had 2 drives to cycle them every morning. > > The most demanded resource on the machine during the sync process > was CPU. I don't have access to that machine and data anymore, as I > said, but I'm sure that most of you have the knowledge to do it > with your installation and a recent rsync version. > > Could you please try it and confirm that? It will depend greatly on > the machine you are using, ours was a 4 core Xeon with 4 gb of ram > and 2 SATA HDs on a software RAID-1. When rsyncing the pool, > BackupPC was stopped obviously and no other unneeded daemons or > programs where running. I have a much slower machine with only 2.5GB RAM. But again CPU has not been my issue. Perhaps others could try to replicate your results but again I haven't heard anyone having close to your reported experience. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Colocation vs. Managed Hosting A question and answer guide to determining the best fit for your organization - today and in the future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d _______________________________________________ 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/
