On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Jean Spirat wrote:
>
>> Excuse my "off topic"-ness, but with that many small files I kind of expect a
>> filesystem to reach certain limits. Why is that webapp written to use many
>> little files? Why not with a database where all that stuff is in blobs?
>> That wh
> Excuse my "off topic"-ness, but with that many small files I kind of expect a
> filesystem to reach certain limits. Why is that webapp written to use many
> little files? Why not with a database where all that stuff is in blobs?
> That whould be easier to maintain and easier to back up.
>
> Have
Hi,
On Friday 16 December 2011 10:42:00 Jean Spirat wrote:
> I use backuppc to save a webserver. The issue is that the application
> used on it is making thousand of little files used for a game to create
> maps and various things. The issue is that we are now at 100GB of data
> and 8.030.000 fi
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 07:33 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 4:49 AM, Jean Spirat wrote:
> > for my understanding rsync had allways seems to be the most efficient
> > of the two but i never challenged this "fact" ;p
>
> Rsync working natively is very efficient, but think abo
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 4:42 AM, Jean Spirat wrote:
> The issue is that we are now at 100GB of data
> and 8.030.000 files so the backups takes 48H and more (to help the files
> are on NFS share). I think i come to the point where file backup is at
> it's limit.
What about a script on this machine
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 4:49 AM, Jean Spirat wrote:
>
> Hum i cannot directly use the FS i have no access to the NFS server that
> is on the hosting company side i just have access to the webserver that
> use the nfs partition to store it's content. Right now i also mount the
> nfs share on the b
I highly recommend **against** using any protocol conversion in the
mix "USB to eSATA" or whatever.
True eSATA is fine - obviously the quality of the hardware is an
issue. Firewire is also OK but getting rarer these days.
Internal SATA to eSATA should also not be a problem, not really doing
any c
Dne 16.12.2011 10:18, Tim Fletcher napsal(a):
> On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 16:38 -0500, Zach La Celle wrote:
>
>> Regarding some other responses, I'll be sure to try eSATA next time
>> instead of USB to see if that tends to be more stable. I could also use
>> internal drives, I suppose...the real re
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 11:49 +0100, Jean Spirat wrote:
> > I would suggest you try the following:
> > tar+ssh backups however use more bandwidth but as you are already using
> > nfs I am assuming you are on a local network of some sort.
> for my understanding rsync had allways seems to be the mo
r.
>
>
> I would suggest you try the following:
>
> Move to tar over ssh on the remote webserver, the first full backup
> might well take a long time but the following ones should be faster.
>
> tar+ssh backups however use more bandwidth but as you are already using
> nfs I am assuming you are on
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 10:42 +0100, Jean Spirat wrote:
> hi,
>
> I use backuppc to save a webserver. The issue is that the application
> used on it is making thousand of little files used for a game to create
> maps and various things. The issue is that we are now at 100GB of data
> and 8.030.
hi,
I use backuppc to save a webserver. The issue is that the application
used on it is making thousand of little files used for a game to create
maps and various things. The issue is that we are now at 100GB of data
and 8.030.000 files so the backups takes 48H and more (to help the files
ar
On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 16:38 -0500, Zach La Celle wrote:
> Regarding some other responses, I'll be sure to try eSATA next time
> instead of USB to see if that tends to be more stable. I could also use
> internal drives, I suppose...the real reason we're using external disks
> is so that we can rep
13 matches
Mail list logo
