On 01/26/10 10:39, Cyril Lavier wrote:
> Phil Stracchino wrote:
>
>> On 01/26/10 09:12, Cyril Lavier wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Phil Stracchino wrote:
>>>
>>>
Cyril, I would look at the load on all the machines involved,
particularly the machine running the catalog and Director.
Phil Stracchino wrote:
> On 01/26/10 09:12, Cyril Lavier wrote:
>
>> Phil Stracchino wrote:
>>
>>> Cyril, I would look at the load on all the machines involved,
>>> particularly the machine running the catalog and Director. You also did
>>> not specify what you're backing up to.
>>>
>>>
On 01/26/10 09:12, Cyril Lavier wrote:
> Phil Stracchino wrote:
>> Cyril, I would look at the load on all the machines involved,
>> particularly the machine running the catalog and Director. You also did
>> not specify what you're backing up to.
>>
>>
> I'm backing up a big amount of small file
Phil Stracchino wrote:
> On 01/26/10 04:24, Ferdinando Pasqualetti wrote:
>
>> Hello Cyril,
>> did you try using compression? Compression is done at client level, so,
>> if you have CPU power, you could get higher throughput.
>> In my eperience it is very hard to obtain a throughput higher than
On 01/26/10 04:24, Ferdinando Pasqualetti wrote:
> Hello Cyril,
> did you try using compression? Compression is done at client level, so,
> if you have CPU power, you could get higher throughput.
> In my eperience it is very hard to obtain a throughput higher than 50%
> of nominal capacity of the w
Hello Cyril,
did you try using compression? Compression is done at client level, so, if
you have CPU power, you could get higher throughput.
In my eperience it is very hard to obtain a throughput higher than 50% of
nominal capacity of the wire.
---
