Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 12/01/16 07:56, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: Hi Gandalf, Just jumping in here to hopefully provide some guidance. I understand that it can be extremely frustrating when you are migrating from a product you have used for years and has worked well enough to some new product and it isn't

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Adam Goryachev wrote: > > 2016-01-10 00:21:40 Aborting backup up after signal INT > > This line seems to be out of context. I don't think it is related to the > previous (completed) backup, and it shouldn't be related to the

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-12 1:08 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > That seems wrong - (maybe, depending on the counts you are configured > to save). But I thought in your first posting you said you had a > 'partial'. Those would be discarded when a better one completes. > And one of your log

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 12/01/16 11:26, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-12 1:08 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : >> That seems wrong - (maybe, depending on the counts you are configured >> to save). But I thought in your first posting you said you had a >> 'partial'. Those would be discarded

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-11 23:29 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > 1) Define and control your environment > * Define the specs of both your server and client (disks, ram, cpu, > network, raid level, lvm, filesystem, etc) > * Only add one server at a time, when it is working well,

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-12 1:43 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > OK, so we created a new directory for the new host, and started the > first backup (should be number 0). Yes, it was #0 > The backup completed with 4181687 files (looks like a bug because bytes > equals # files)

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-12 1:53 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > Is there any chance you could have > started more than one instance of the backuppc server? Absolutely not. Only "rsync_bpc" is always twice for each running backup (in this case, 1 running backup, so 2 rsync_bpc" backuppc 27940

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > > > server: DELL PE2950 with 2GB ram and 1 quad-core CPU, 6 SATA disks in RAID-5 RAID-5 will cost a lot in performance on small writes. > Initially I've added just 1 server: the biggest one, to

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

Please don't trim so much, it is very useful to still keep the original log that is being discussed. On 12/01/16 11:57, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-12 1:43 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev > : >> The backup completed with 4181687 files (looks like a bug

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-12 1:43 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > A full can certainly happen after a failed incremental, we don't know > why. Again, the time looks very strange, how was this initiated? Can you > provide copies of your configs? The detailed backup logs? I can

[BackupPC-users] $Conf{DumpPreUserCmd} on Windows

Hello Mickael, thanks !! How do you proceed in backuppc to launch winexe before backup ? Can you give me an example ? How to install winexe on debian 7 ? Thanks, and sorry for my english ! +-- |This was sent by

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

2016-01-11 3:03 GMT+01:00 Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom : > I don't know v4, but in v3 we generally do this with a cron job. Something > like this, which causes a job to go off on September 7th. > 00 01 7 9 * backuppc /usr/share/backuppc/bin/BackupPC_serverMesg backup >

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

> -Original Message- > From: Gandalf Corvotempesta [mailto:gandalf.corvotempe...@gmail.com] > Sent: den 11 januari 2016 09:27 > To: General list for user discussion, questions and support > Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow > > 2016-01-11 6:57 GMT+01:00 Alexander Moisseev

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-12 2:19 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > Please don't trim so much, it is very useful to still keep the original > log that is being discussed. I've not trimmed at all. > I would strongly suggest that something has happened here which could be > explained

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > Exactly. This server has more or less 150GB of files. I'm using BackupPC 3.3.1 for a while now and backing up a partition of more than 100GB (from a macbook client) was requiering more than 24 hours on a backupPC server with only 2GB of RAM. Increasing the RAM

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-11 21:32 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > I don't recognize that 'unknown host' log entry. If the transfers > wait for whatever is writing it, it might cause a delay where the time > will depend on the DNS response - if you get an immediate NXDOMAIN > from a local server

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-11 19:10 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : >> Wild guess here, but 'host unknown' usually means something has done a >> DNS lookup (or reverse, number to name) that has failed.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 11.01.16 11:33, Sorin Srbu wrote: > Aren't there usually quite some questions about how to set up the > blackout-periods and related? > There is a lot of confusion on how to set this up. > > May I suggest an overhaul in the GUI, and may be the docs description, for > this feature to simplify

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

> -Original Message- > From: Alexander Moisseev [mailto:mois...@mezonplus.ru] > Sent: den 11 januari 2016 12:48 > To: backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow > > On 11.01.16 11:33, Sorin Srbu wrote: > > Aren't there usually quite some questions

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 11.01.16 11:27, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > But for the rest of my questions ? > > Is the partial backup a "good one"? Should't it be an incremental ? > Why both are "filled"? If I understood properly, only the last one is > filled. 2016-01-10 08:10:48 incr backup started for directory

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-11 12:37 GMT+01:00 Alexander Moisseev : > The incremental backup was interrupted due to fatal error. So, it is > "partial". It means only some files were backed up. > http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/BackupPC-4.0.0alpha3_doc.html#Backup-basics Status 24 should not

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

On 01/11 09:32 , Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-11 3:03 GMT+01:00 Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom : > > I don't know v4, but in v3 we generally do this with a cron job. Something > > like this, which causes a job to go off on September 7th. > > 00 01 7 9 * backuppc

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-11 14:16 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > Something is not working properly and, after all, is absolutely > nonsense 24/48 hours for each backup. The same server with Bacula was > completed in 16 hours. For example, rsync transfer stars, then it stop

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-11 18:05 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > 17 seconds (18:02:58 => 18:03:15) without doing anything. This > happens every 10-15 second and is a waste of time. > Plain rsync doens't have this issue. What is happening in these 17 > seconds on server side?

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

2016-01-11 17:28 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > I haven't used v4 but it sounds like you have some issue with your > network, rsync, or lack of resources. The main difference between a > full and incremental should just be that the full will do a complete > read on the client

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

On 01/11 05:58 , Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > I don't have any issue with my network, the same server, with Bacula > (i'm running Bacula and BackupPC on the same server, obviously one per > time) > will backup the same huge client in 16 hours, not 3 days. > > Same server, same disks, same

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote: > On 01/11 09:32 , Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: >> 2016-01-11 3:03 GMT+01:00 Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom : >> > I don't know v4, but in v3 we generally do this with a cron job. Something >> >

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

2016-01-11 18:18 GMT+01:00 Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom : > For initial transfers, rsync is notably slower than tar or the like (I don't > remember how Bacula does it). After the initial transfers tho, it should get > faster. If you're still seeing this slowness after a couple of

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-11 18:05 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta > : >> 17 seconds (18:02:58 => 18:03:15) without doing anything. This >> happens every 10-15 second and is a waste

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

2016-01-11 18:47 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > What about RAM and disk speed? 2GB and standard SATA disks @7200 Tomorrow (if backup will end) i'll add more ram up to 4GB or 8GB > In any case you might check > to see if the server side has free RAM and is not swapping to disk.

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-11 17:28 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : >> I haven't used v4 but it sounds like you have some issue with your >> network, rsync, or lack of resources. The main difference

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

2016-01-11 18:53 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > I would like to add more ram, but i'm waiting for current backup to > end from this Friday Anyway, 2 days ago I had 1 full backup completed. a couple of hours after, an incremental was started and

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-11 18:53 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta > : >> I would like to add more ram, but i'm waiting for current backup to >> end from this Friday > >

Re: [BackupPC-users] Schedule backups

2016-01-11 19:04 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > Are you sure the full completely succeeded? If not it might have > been marked as a 'partial' which would be replaced by a subsequent run > with more files. 100% sure, i've seen backups marked as "full". Ok for "partial"

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-11 19:10 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > Wild guess here, but 'host unknown' usually means something has done a > DNS lookup (or reverse, number to name) that has failed. DNS lookups > can be slow.Maybe sticking the client hosts and IPs in your > /etc/hosts file