> On Feb 17, 2016, at 9:57 AM, Martin Simmons <mar...@lispworks.com
> <mailto:mar...@lispworks.com>> wrote:
>
>>>>>> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:59:10 -0500, Dan Langille said:
>>
>> As a test, I scp'd over all the volumes for one job and timed it:
>>
>> real 167m15.956s
>> user 117m51.006s
>> sys 23m56.653s
>>
>> FWIW, these copies were done while a ZFS scrub was underway, so if anything,
>> the potential throughput is higher.
>>
>> The job above, took nearly 11 hours. Something is up.
>>
>> I tried another test run, just now, but cancelled it after the first two
>> Volumes were read; it was going at about the same rate as the full job
>> mentioned above.
>>
>> What might account for this vast difference?
>
> You could try profiling it, e.g
> http://www.brendangregg.com/FlameGraphs/cpuflamegraphs.html#DTrace
> <http://www.brendangregg.com/FlameGraphs/cpuflamegraphs.html#DTrace>
This is a great idea. Have you done this before? I haven't and my first
attempt seems to be interesting.
http://www.langille.org/tmp/bacula-copy.svg
<http://www.langille.org/tmp/bacula-copy.svg>
It didn't run very long, and thus I'm not sure how relevant the information is
--
Dan Langille - BSDCan / PGCon
d...@langille.org <mailto:d...@langille.org>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
