> Depending on how comfortable you are building your own packages, > Fedora has 3.2.1 almost ready to go. We had to package two perl > modules for the added FTP support. > > If you are willing to try them but don't want to build yourself I > could probably build them for you. > > Thanks, > Richard Sure, I'll try NetBackup 3.2.1. I have not build packages before myself, although I wouldn't mind first using Fedora to see if the performance will actually be good for me.
> What is the CPU utilization during the BackupPC backup? What is the > network utilization? What is the disk utilization? Is the machine > swapping? Is it doing something else? The CPU utilization used to be very high until I disabled gzip compression last week. This did not affect performance, just processor usage. The machine is not swapping and has free memory even. The server i s a clean CentOS install with minimal packages installed, although on Debian the server did not perform better. I have installed packages via 1) EPEL and 2) Debian repository. During back-ups the load often goes up to an average of 2 or 3, cpu-utilisation is still somewhat high, although much lower than before disabling gzip compression. > Start with "vmstat 1" on the BackupPC box and watch it. See what the > usage pattern looks like. Try to find out what is limiting your > performance. I will read into vmstat to see how it can help me see if the problem is IO-related or what it's related to. Thanks for the tip. > We've been trying to tell you that you're seeing abnormal performance. I > get much better performance with a single 1.5GHz VIA processor, 512MB RAM > and a single SATA spindle. Something is wrong here. We are not going to > be able to tell you what: you will have to dig a little deeper and see > what your machine is doing during a backup. Yes, I seem to be poor at troubleshooting bad performance with BackupPC. > Lots of tiny files, especially combined with a shortage of RAM (rsync > transfers > the entire directory listing and holds it in memory before starting the > transfer). > > Huge sparse files (but not many other things handle them well either). > > Running in a VM. Worst case is probably a VM with an LVM on a virtual disk > with sparse allocation (growing as needed). > > Anything else with activity on the same physical disk competing for head > position. The server has enough RAM for sure. There are a lot of tiny files, but only because BackupPC is said to back-up all files/directories starting from /. A fresh CentOS/Debian install seems to have already 30.000 files. The most crowded server has 200.000 files. Thanks for all your replies. I am purchasing 2 new servers next month and I am planning to install Backup 3.2.1 on one of these and benchmark backing up a fresh Linux install. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list [email protected] List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
