> On 10 Feb 2017, at 01:21, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 12:38:32 +1300 > Henri Shustak <henri.shus...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> As Ben mentioned, ZFS snapshots is one possible approach. Another >> approach is to have a faster storage system. I have seen considerable >> speed improvements with rsync on similar data sets by say upgrading >> the storage sub system. > > Another possibility could be to use lvm and lvmcache to throw a ssd in > front of the spinning disks. This would only improve things if > you didn't otherwise fill up the cache with data -- you want > the cache to contain inodes. So this might work only if your > ssd cache was larger than whatever amount of data you typically > write between rsync runs, plus enough to hold all the inodes > in your rsync-ed fs. > > I've not tried this. I'm not even certain it's a good idea. It's > just a thought.
It's also possible to have a SSD cache with ZFS (called the L2ARC). You can even ask this cache to only store your metadata. Some (same ?) changes may also be needed on receiver/server side too (depending on its current setting) to see a performance improvement. Ben -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html