On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 17:57, Phil Stracchino <ph...@caerllewys.net> wrote:
> On 5/9/24 11:47, Marcin Haba wrote: > > Hello Phil, > > > > For the slow Bacula restore, BAT the same as Baculum and Bacularis uses > > Bacula Bvfs interface for doing restore. The Bvfs restore part > > responsible for preserving hardlinks causes this slowness. Some time ago > > I researched it a bit. The result together with a workaround you can > > find in this thread: > > > > https://sourceforge.net/p/bacula/mailman/message/58758531/ > > <https://sourceforge.net/p/bacula/mailman/message/58758531/> > > > > Traditional restore using the bconsole 'restore' command interface does > > not cause this problem (it does not use Bvfs). > > > Huh. Now I'm curious to benchmark that and see how different the > performance is. > > This ought to be an ideal case because there are no hardlinks involved, > so both should restore EXACTLY the same set of files. > > Hello Phil, In this algorithm it does not matter if hardlinks exist or not because examined are all file records. It is because to know if hardlink is used or not for a file, Bacula has to decode Bacula LStat string for this file from the File table. And for many files it takes time. Best regards, Marcin Haba (gani) -- "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." Jesus Christ "Większej miłości nikt nie ma nad tę, jak gdy kto życie swoje kładzie za przyjaciół swoich." Jezus Chrystus
_______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
