Simon Köstlin wrote:
> Could it be that the problem is with my NFS, because if I mount the NFS it
> takes also around 30 seconds until it is mounted. I'm mounting my NFS with
> "mount -t nfs 192.168.0.5:/home/backuppc /nas".
>
>
It might (or might not) help to specify options for rsize and wsiz
det: Donnerstag, 25. Januar 2007 21:07
An: Simon Köstlin
Cc: 'Les Mikesell'; backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Betreff: Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC Data Directory on a Network Attached
Storage
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 08:58:17PM +0100, Simon Köstlin wrote:
> I think TCP is a safer c
Travis Fraser wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 13:09 -0700, Brien Dieterle wrote:
>
>> Most NFS servers are pitifully slow compared to a local filesystem,
>> particularly when dealing with many small files. It pains me to think
>> about how slow that might get-- is anyone else using a non-local
>
lin
> > Cc: backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > Betreff: Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC Data Directory on a Network Attached
> > Storage
> >
> > Simon Köstlin wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I want to have the Data Directory on a Network Attached Sto
anuar 2007 21:07
An: Simon Köstlin
Cc: 'Les Mikesell'; backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Betreff: Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC Data Directory on a Network Attached
Storage
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 08:58:17PM +0100, Simon Köstlin wrote:
> I think TCP is a safer connection or plays th
An: Simon Köstlin
Cc: 'Les Mikesell'; backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Betreff: Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC Data Directory on a Network Attached
Storage
Simon Köstlin wrote:
> I think TCP is a safer connection or plays that none rolls?
> Also when I click on a PC in the web
Directory on a Network Attached
Storage
Simon Köstlin wrote:
I want to have the Data Directory on a Network Attached Storage (NAS)
and not on the BackupPC Server. The NAS supports NFS, SMB, FTP, CIFS
and SSH. I tried to mount an NFS Share on the NAS and that works well.
So I can use the
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 08:58:17PM +0100, Simon Köstlin wrote:
> I think TCP is a safer connection or plays that none rolls?
on local networks with little or no packet loss, UDP is a better choice
than TCP for NFS. TCP will probably actually slow NFS down a little.
If you have packet loss, i'd su
Simon Köstlin wrote:
> I think TCP is a safer connection or plays that none rolls?
> Also when I click on a PC in the web interface it takes around 20-30 seconds
> until the web page appears with the backups which were made. I thought that
> would be better with an other connection. But that time i
Betreff: Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC Data Directory on a Network Attached
Storage
Simon Köstlin wrote:
>
>
>
> I want to have the Data Directory on a Network Attached Storage (NAS)
> and not on the BackupPC Server. The NAS supports NFS, SMB, FTP, CIFS
> and SSH. I tried to
Le Thu, 25 Jan 2007 20:29:05 +0100,
Simon Köstlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I want to have the Data Directory on a Network Attached Storage (NAS)
> and not on the BackupPC Server. The NAS supports NFS, SMB, FTP, CIFS
> and SSH. I tried to mount an NFS Share on the NAS and tha
Simon Köstlin wrote:
>
>
>
> I want to have the Data Directory on a Network Attached Storage (NAS)
> and not on the BackupPC Server. The NAS supports NFS, SMB, FTP, CIFS
> and SSH. I tried to mount an NFS Share on the NAS and that works well.
> So I can use the Data Directory in this Share. Bu
Hi,
I want to have the Data Directory on a Network Attached Storage (NAS) and
not on the BackupPC Server. The NAS supports NFS, SMB, FTP, CIFS and SSH. I
tried to mount an NFS Share on the NAS and that works well. So I can use the
Data Directory in this Share. But the NAS supports only a UDP co
13 matches
Mail list logo
