On 09/11 09:40 , Alexander Moisseev via BackupPC-users wrote:
> On 11.09.2019 18:19, Robert Trevellyan wrote:
> > I'm letting ZFS do the compression (using the default of LZ4) with BackupPC 
> > handling deduplication. I think you'll find a reasonable consensus that ZFS 
> > compression is always a win for storage space (it will store 
> > un-compressible data unmodified), whereas ZFS deduplication is best avoided 
> > in most cases, mostly due to its high memory usage. It's possible that 
> > BackupPC compression would be tighter than LZ4,
> Actually, on ZFS you are not limited to LZ4, but in ZFS each file block is 
> compressed independently, that is why in most cases BackupPC compression is 
> higher, though it depends on data.
> We moved from 77.96G cpool to pool on compressed filesystem recently. Now it 
> consumes 81.2G, so there is not much difference.
> # zfs get compression,compressratio,recordsize,referenced zroot/bpc/pool
> NAME            PROPERTY       VALUE     SOURCE
> zroot/bpc/pool  compression    gzip-3    local
> zroot/bpc/pool  compressratio  3.87x     -
> zroot/bpc/pool  recordsize     128K      default
> zroot/bpc/pool  referenced     81,2G     -

Thanks Alexander, those details are really helpful.

Carl Soderstrom
Systems Administrator
Real-Time Enterprises

BackupPC-users mailing list
List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:    http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

Reply via email to