Well, this particular client probably qualifies as slow local disk and fast network (1Gb). Some of the file systems are presented to the client via Infiniband backend. Generally, I’ve found the file system traversal to be the chokepoint. Another reason to have multiple threads running and living with any slowness introduced by the multiplexing on the pipeline. I can see 4 threads, but only one has any usage.
The SD has only this backup going which was true when the backup was started. The director has one other backup with a different SD and different network, although when I started the job, there were quite a few others in-progress at that time. Patti From: Dimitri Maziuk <dmaz...@bmrb.wisc.edu<mailto:dmaz...@bmrb.wisc.edu>> Organization: BioMagResBank, UW-Madison Date: Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 10:57 AM To: "bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net>" <bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net>> Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Client multiplexing On 2016-01-07 07:25, Clark, Patti wrote: ... Without creating separate jobs and fileset definitions, is there any way to have Bacula multiplex these file systems using one job? Are you backing up slow disks over a very fast network? I would expect this to be limited by net rather than disk, especially if you're also multiplexing jobs and have the server reading from multiple clients at once. Dimitri ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
