Hi,
13.10.2009 10:08, justAck wrote:
Hi,
I still have to learn bacula internals, but urgently need answer for
question regarding fragmentation of restored file(s).
Perhaps someone did backup of heavily fragmented file (size: ~100G) and then
restored it to clean XFS volume on idle box.
justAck wrote:
The problem is that copying of restored file is ~20% slower than expected
(than other files), I doubt if bacula may be a reason of this slowdown (e.g.
result of restore is very fragmented).
Fragmentation is not a performance problem on Unix-like filesystems.
Sparseness is (see
Arno,
Arno Lehmann wrote:
...
a) result file will be most likely not fragmented on disk at all
This is most likely in the situation you outline.
...
The most common reasons for slow restores, in my experience, are
...
Thanks for quick and useful help.
I meant file access _after_
Hello,
13.10.2009 14:27, justAck wrote:
Arno,
Arno Lehmann wrote:
...
a) result file will be most likely not fragmented on disk at all
This is most likely in the situation you outline.
...
The most common reasons for slow restores, in my experience, are
...
Thanks for quick and
Hi again,
13.10.2009 20:35, Arno Lehmann wrote:
Hello,
13.10.2009 14:27, justAck wrote:
Arno,
Arno Lehmann wrote:
...
Maybe some cache is involved, need to test deeper, just wanted feedback
about possible scenarios.
See above - I'd try vmstat 1 during a restore and subsequent read
justAck wrote:
Hi,
I still have to learn bacula internals, but urgently need answer for
question regarding fragmentation of restored file(s).
Perhaps someone did backup of heavily fragmented file (size: ~100G) and then
restored it to clean XFS volume on idle box.
What is more likely:
a)
