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 www.real-time.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/
