Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-02-10 16:34 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : >> If you want to keep more than one full shouldn't FullKeepCnt and maybe >> FullKeepMin be higher? > > As wrote many, many, many,

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 4:40 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-02-07 17:25 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : >> How many filled backups are you configured to keep? And have you >> adjusted the FillCycle value accordingly? According to the

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-02-10 16:34 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > If you want to keep more than one full shouldn't FullKeepCnt and maybe > FullKeepMin be higher? As wrote many, many, many, many times before: IT DOESN'T WORK. I'm trying any possible combination with settings trying to get at

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > As wrote many, many, many, many times before: IT DOESN'T WORK. I don't think shouting will enamor anyone for you or your plight. Neither will repeating the same complaint ad infinitum. > I'm trying any possible combination with settings

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-02-07 17:25 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > How many filled backups are you configured to keep? And have you > adjusted the FillCycle value accordingly? According to the docs, if > there aren't any filled backups other than the most recent, then > FillKeepPeriod won't have

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-31 10:01 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > I have some updates. > Now seems to working properly, no more deleted backups. I have #1, #3, > #4 .. #8 > So, the only missing backups are #0 and #2 > #1 and #3 are both incremental unfilled, #4 is a filled

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-27 20:56 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > Actually is removing the WHOLE backup, making some days unavailable to > restore. I have some updates. Now seems to working properly, no more deleted backups. I have #1, #3, #4 .. #8 So, the only missing

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 1/28/2016 9:32 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-27 23:24 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta > : >> I had this: >> >> $Conf{FullPeriod} = 27.97; >> >> now changed to >> >> $Conf{FullPeriod} = 7.97; >> >> just in case bpc was parsing only the first digit. >

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: > On 1/28/2016 9:32 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: >>> >> Config saved by web interface: >> # grep '$Conf{FullPeriod}' config.pl >> $Conf{FullPeriod} = '6.97'; >> >> Original config, prior saving from web. >> # grep

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-28 17:42 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > on the other hand there is > difference between '6.97' and 7.97. If that isn't a typo, something > odd happened. That's ok, i've changed the config through admin panel to change FullPeriod from 7.97 to 6.97 that's why I saw the

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-27 23:24 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > I had this: > > $Conf{FullPeriod} = 27.97; > > now changed to > > $Conf{FullPeriod} = 7.97; > > just in case bpc was parsing only the first digit. I've also noticed that original configuration is using float

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-28 16:03 GMT+01:00 Bowie Bailey : > This is Perl. There is no real distinction between strings, integers, > and floats. 7.97, '7.97', and "7.97" (along with a few other more > obscure variants) will all be interpreted the same. Thanks for clarification.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-27 22:50 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > And yet, other people who haven't made your changes don't see that > issue. I don't know why it would happen but I wonder if your > FullPeriod is somehow getting parsed as 2. I had this: $Conf{FullPeriod} = 27.97; now changed

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-26 22:58 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > Let's see what happens this night. Still another full is running. (obviously, there are no full in the pool, as BPC is removing previous backups on every run) It makes a full, then the day after it makes an

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote on 2016-01-27 11:28:24 +0100 [Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow]: > [basically the same thing over and over again] In case it's not obvious, adjust the settings so they specify to do what you want. Before that, preferably, understand the settings. Use the suita

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-27 20:19 GMT+01:00 Kris Lou : > Your $Conf{FullKeepCnt} = 1, which means to keep 1 filled backup. (Not > necessarily 1 Full backup) That's ok for me. Probably i'll increase that to 2, but even 1 would be ok > After a successful backup (full or incr), the most

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

ome more v4 attention to the list. -Kris Kris Lou k...@themusiclink.net On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Holger Parplies <wb...@parplies.de> wrote: > Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote on 2016-01-27 11:28:24 +0100 [Re: > [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow]: > > [basically the same thin

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-27 21:32 GMT+01:00 Norm Legare : > I think he meant use v4 as its configured "out-of-the-box". I'm using it "out-of-the-box" except for incremental keep count and mail notification (and exclude dirs for rsync) I've not customized anything that could lead to issue

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-27 21:32 GMT+01:00 Norm Legare : >> I think he meant use v4 as its configured "out-of-the-box". > > I've not customized anything that could lead to issue to backup

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-27 9:19 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > It makes a full, then the day after it makes an incremental and > removed the previous full. After that, the next backup would > be another full (as there are no more full available). And so on This is what I

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-25 18:22 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > Let's see if tonight backup #0 would be removed as usual As expected, srv3 is now in "delete #0" phase. -- Site24x7 APM Insight: Get

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-26 16:46 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta > : >> As expected, srv3 is now in "delete #0" phase. > > I think that BPC is trying to remove "common" files between the last > executed backup and the previous

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-26 21:13 GMT+01:00 Stephen : > In the steady state, each time a full backup completes successfully the > oldest one is removed. If this number is decreased, the extra old backups > will be removed. So, is normal that BPC is totally removing the older backup

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-26 22:58 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > So, is normal that BPC is totally removing the older backup after a > successful one ? > Let's see what happens this night. Anyway, this is totally wrong as i'm unable to restore files from an older backup. For

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-24 23:17 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > Could you please try changing the share name to something other than full. I've changed the share name to "everything" and added a brand new client to backup. 2016-01-25 09:49:44 full backup started for directory

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-24 23:17 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > Could you please try changing the share name to something other than full. Changed share name to "everything". Now I'm running a brand new backup to a brand new client. Let's see.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-24 23:17 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev > : >> Could you please try changing the share name to something other than full. > > I've changed the share name to

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-23 12:10 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > Let's see what would happen this night. The same happened again. 2016-01-22 22:41:19 Created directory /var/backups/backuppc/pc/srv1/refCnt 2016-01-22 22:41:19 full backup started for directory full 2016-01-23

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 24/01/2016 20:48, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-23 12:10 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta > : >> Let's see what would happen this night. > The same happened again. > > 2016-01-22 22:41:19 Created directory /var/backups/backuppc/pc/srv1/refCnt >

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-24 10:48 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > I don't think this is normal. I'm started from scratch for the third > (or fourth) time, with no pool files or previous dumps. Its a plain > installation of BPC and something is not working properly. Another

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-24 23:17 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > Could you please try changing the share name to something other than full. I'll try tomorrow morning. I would like to keep this backup running.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-21 23:46 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > Then you have some other error causing problems. Check various things > such as permissions, disk space, errors on the client, etc. Something is > causing rsync to fail, and you will need to fix that to get

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-21 12:41 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > Try changing the sharename, see if it makes a difference. You could try > "complete" or similar. Worst case, it makes no difference, but best > case, it will solve your problem, and provide a big clue about a bug.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-21 11:44 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > Silly question but have you named the host full or the share full? > A lot of your logs that you posted seemed to have full as one of those > names. It could be confusing bpc and it's unlikely that anyone has >

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 21/01/2016 22:22, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-21 12:16 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev > : >> OK, I'd suggest to try changing this to something else. Usually I would >> backup / which obviously means the whole server (ie, root folder and >> everything

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 21 January 2016 8:42:23 pm AEDT, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: >2016-01-21 10:23 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta >: >> This is what I see from control panel during copying #5 => #4 (right >now) > >Copy finished now is running a

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-21 10:23 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > This is what I see from control panel during copying #5 => #4 (right now) Copy finished now is running a backup (seems to be an incremental) In status column I see: "backup full" and in Type column: "incr" What

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 3:23 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > > This is what I see from control panel during copying #5 => #4 (right now) > > If I understood properly, only last backup should be filled. This > seems ok in my environment, > as all except #5 are

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-21 16:30 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > V4 does it backwards from v3. The last backup is always filled and > the older ones are changed to reverse deltas. It must move/copy > things around to arrange that. And the full and incremental runs > aren't tied to keeping

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-21 16:30 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : >> V4 does it backwards from v3. The last backup is always filled and >> the older ones are changed to reverse deltas. It must

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-21 18:43 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > I see some earlier mail list messages saying that is normal: > http://sourceforge.net/p/backuppc/mailman/message/34478542/ > I guess that's when it removes files that are not in any current > backup. Apparently it only takes a

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-21 23:58 GMT+01:00 Stephen : > I have glanced at the code and also believe that BackupPC_fsck is running > unnecessarily after every backup attempt, whether it is successful or not. Please check if you have a file called "needFsck.dump" in your refCnt directory.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 22/01/16 09:58, Stephen wrote: > I have glanced at the code and also believe that BackupPC_fsck is running > unnecessarily after every backup attempt, whether it is successful or not. > > In my xferLogs, BackupPC_refCountUpdate is being called twice at the end of > a backup. Once like this: > >

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-21 23:09 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > Can you run dmesg, and see if you have any lines like this: > [11613050.504117] rsync_bpc[7279]: segfault at 7f9ee5c7e428 ip > 004473af sp 7ffc3d7bdf80 error 4 in rsync_bpc[40+75000] > > There seems

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

I have glanced at the code and also believe that BackupPC_fsck is running unnecessarily after every backup attempt, whether it is successful or not. In my xferLogs, BackupPC_refCountUpdate is being called twice at the end of a backup. Once like this: Xfer PIDs are now Running

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 22/01/16 05:45, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-21 18:43 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : >> I see some earlier mail list messages saying that is normal: >> http://sourceforge.net/p/backuppc/mailman/message/34478542/ >> I guess that's when it removes files that are not in

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 22/01/16 04:43, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta > wrote: >> 2016-01-21 16:30 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : >>> V4 does it backwards from v3. The last backup is always filled and >>> the older

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 22/01/16 09:20, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-21 23:09 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev > : >> Can you run dmesg, and see if you have any lines like this: >> [11613050.504117] rsync_bpc[7279]: segfault at 7f9ee5c7e428 ip >> 004473af sp

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-19 11:03 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > As expected, #2 now is missing. I have #1 (incremental), #3 (incremental) Now, another full is running for srv2. I have: SRV2: #1 incremental #2 incremental #4 active (is a full) #0 and #3 are missing. SRV1:

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-18 16:40 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > Exactly. I'm trying to debug why #0 disappeared. > The same happend with both server. The same happened even some days > ago (where all of my issue started) Another backup is running. now I have these statuses

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-19 9:39 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > srv2: "merge #2 -> 1" As expected, #2 now is missing. I have #1 (incremental), #3 (incremental) there are some issues As I'm using standard BPC4 configuration, I think that there are some bugs.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 4:03 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-19 9:39 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta > : >> srv2: "merge #2 -> 1" > > As expected, #2 now is missing. I have #1 (incremental), #3 (incremental) > > there

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-19 17:01 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > I'd bump up FullKeepCntMin and IncrKeepCntMin to the numbers you want > to see if that keeps them from being expired early. I always did that > with v3 too just in case something odd happened with the system clock > and to keep

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-19 17:01 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : >> I'd bump up FullKeepCntMin and IncrKeepCntMin to the numbers you want >> to see if that keeps them from being expired early. I

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-19 17:31 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > The space usage will only be affected by files that are > changed/deleted between runs. Any file that still has identical > content will be pooled into one stored instance regardless of how many > backups contain it. That's the

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-18 2:46 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > It would be interesting to hear an update of where you are at, and what > has happened (either good or bad). Ok, today is the third day of backup running "properly". Some things are not clear: 2016-01-16 01:32:24

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Alexander Moisseev wrote: > On 18.01.16 19:53, Les Mikesell wrote: >> Does anyone understand the docs at >> http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/BackupPC-4.0.0alpha3_doc.html >> for $Conf{FillCycle} ? It looks like expiring is really based on

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-18 17:07 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > Why don't you put back the default settings to see they work as > expected? Because i'm using default settings except posted lines. I wont decrease full interval, not for waste of space but to not transfer everything from the

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 18.01.16 21:33, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Alexander Moisseev > wrote: >> On 18.01.16 19:53, Les Mikesell wrote: >>> Does anyone understand the docs at >>> http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/BackupPC-4.0.0alpha3_doc.html >>> for $Conf{FillCycle}

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 16.01.16 22:16, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-16 19:53 GMT+01:00 Alexander Moisseev : >> You mentioned earlier you are trying to backup dovecot with Maildir. Do you >> have considered to move from Maildir to mdbox? It will definitely help with >> BackupPC and

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 18.01.16 4:46, Adam Goryachev wrote: > So, while generating the file list might take a long time with BPC v3, I > don't think it should significantly change the overall backup time. Assuming checksum caching configured, for first and second backup, yes. But it is not true for subsequent

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 17/01/16 05:53, Alexander Moisseev wrote: > On 16.01.16 15:04, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: >> I can't use v3 because i'm having servers with millions of file to be >> transfered and v3 takes ages in "Building files list". > You mentioned earlier you are trying to backup dovecot with Maildir.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 16/01/16 23:04, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-14 23:00 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev > : >> I would suggest anyone considering BPC should use v3 unless they >> specifically need the v4 features, and even then, are prepared for the >> possible

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-14 23:00 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > I would suggest anyone considering BPC should use v3 unless they > specifically need the v4 features, and even then, are prepared for the > possible shortcomings inherent in using alpha software. I can't use v3

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-16 19:53 GMT+01:00 Alexander Moisseev : > You mentioned earlier you are trying to backup dovecot with Maildir. Do you > have considered to move from Maildir to mdbox? It will definitely help with > BackupPC and rsync performance. More over you will be able to use

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 16.01.16 15:04, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > I can't use v3 because i'm having servers with millions of file to be > transfered and v3 takes ages in "Building files list". You mentioned earlier you are trying to backup dovecot with Maildir. Do you have considered to move from Maildir to

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

Hi, much has been said in this thread, but I believe this has not: You do realize that BackupPC 4.x is alpha software, right? You're lucky if it works at all, you should be surprised if it performs well, and you're not using it in a production environment anyway, right? Ok, the reality might not

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Holger Parplies wrote: > > For me (and, I believe, for many others), version 3 (and even version 2!) > works > so well that there is no reason to move to version 4. > I have to agree with that. Really about the only issue people have with v3

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 15/01/16 05:55, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Holger Parplies wrote: >> For me (and, I believe, for many others), version 3 (and even version 2!) >> works >> so well that there is no reason to move to version 4. >> > I have to agree with that.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-13 21:07 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > 2016/01/13 20:48:21 [19453] 2016/01/13 20:48:21: host unknown > (172.17.0.1) send > home/user/domains/domain.it/public_html/cgi-bin/.htaccess (17 bytes). > Total 43 bytes. > 2016/01/13 20:48:21 [19453] 2016/01/13

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-12 8:29 GMT+01:00 Patrick Begou : > 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 to

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-13 20:39 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > # cat /var/log/BackupPC/LOG > 2016-01-13 20:21:26 Running BackupPC_Admin_SCGI (pid=29415) > 2016-01-13 20:22:11 Reading hosts file > 2016-01-13 20:22:11 BackupPC started, pid 29463 > 2016-01-13 20:22:11 Running

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > >> >> Totally frozen between 2016/01/13 20:48:21 and 2016/01/13 21:03:29 Did your strace test show a hanging system call on any of the active processes in this time? > raw performance writing to

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-13 22:07 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : > Did your strace test show a hanging system call on any of the active > processes in this time? Nothing is hanged. When this occurs, no transfer is happening via network and both "rsync_bpc" processes are parsing tons of these:

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 14/01/16 08:14, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-13 22:07 GMT+01:00 Les Mikesell : >> Did your strace test show a hanging system call on any of the active >> processes in this time? > Nothing is hanged. When this occurs, no transfer is happening via network > and

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-13 22:14 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta : > Nothing is hanged. When this occurs, no transfer is happening via network > and both "rsync_bpc" processes are parsing tons of these: Seems to be a write delay. rsync doesn't send new files until BPC has

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-14 0:06 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > However, note that this is happening while BackupPC_nightly is running, > so there is plenty of other IO happening in the background. (in v3 there > is a nightly process which checks every file in the pool to see if

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

2016-01-14 0:06 GMT+01:00 Adam Goryachev : > Whoops, that was writing to the SSD for the root FS I was rather > surprised at the high number, but didn't stop and think properly. > Please see the revised stat: > dr:/mnt/imagestore# dd if=/dev/zero

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 14/01/16 09:29, Adam Goryachev wrote: > On 14/01/16 08:14, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > >> raw performance writing to disk on BPC server (same partitions used by >> BPC as storage): >> >> # dd if=/dev/zero of=/var/backups/test.img bs=1M count=1 >> ^C8815+0 records in >> 8815+0 records out

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-13 22:14 GMT+01:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta > : >> Nothing is hanged. When this occurs, no transfer is happening via network >> and both "rsync_bpc" processes are

Re: [BackupPC-users] BPC 4 very slow

On 12/01/2016 19:00, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > 2016-01-12 8:29 GMT+01:00 Patrick Begou : >> 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 >>

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

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 Ale

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 u

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

  1   2   >