Re: [Bacula-users] increased speed dramatically by downgrading

2006-09-01 Thread Alan Brown
On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Marco wrote: Just an idea: I did not build v1.38.11 and v1.38.8 myself but installed the debian packages. During the downgrade I noticed that there were changes concerning sqlite and sqlite3. Sqlite is NOT a production quality database and should NOT be used in a

Re: [Bacula-users] increased speed dramatically by downgrading

2006-09-01 Thread Marco
Alan Brown wrote: Sqlite is NOT a production quality database and should NOT be used in a production backup system. It is only included for testing purposes. sqlite may not compete with a true DBMS but there isn't a performance issue with sqlite2 in small environments like mine. And it has

[Bacula-users] increased speed dramatically by downgrading

2006-08-31 Thread Marco
Hello, I was very disappointed about the performance of backups after upgrading from 1.38.5 to 1.38.11. The rates dropped to 10% of before. After downgrading to 1.38.8 the performance is good again. In which version was the change? Can we expect the former performance for future versions?

Re: [Bacula-users] increased speed dramatically by downgrading

2006-08-31 Thread Zakai Kinan
Did you upgrade and downgrade every agent? ZK --- Marco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I was very disappointed about the performance of backups after upgrading from 1.38.5 to 1.38.11. The rates dropped to 10% of before. After downgrading to 1.38.8 the performance is good again.

Re: [Bacula-users] increased speed dramatically by downgrading

2006-08-31 Thread Kern Sibbald
On Thursday 31 August 2006 17:28, Marco wrote: Hello, I was very disappointed about the performance of backups after upgrading from 1.38.5 to 1.38.11. The rates dropped to 10% of before. After downgrading to 1.38.8 the performance is good again. In which version was the change? Can

Re: [Bacula-users] increased speed dramatically by downgrading

2006-08-31 Thread Marco
Kern Sibbald wrote: Unfortunately, I don't have enough information to answer this question. I've read that some people are having performance problems with the Win32 version, but I haven't seen any hard data comparing equal filesets before and after (or after upgrade and then after

Re: [Bacula-users] increased speed dramatically by downgrading

2006-08-31 Thread Marco
Maybe that helps: 1-Aug 16:26 server1-dir: Bacula 1.38.8 (14Apr06): 31-Aug-2006 16:26:48 JobId: 1 Job:Server.2006-08-31_14.59.55 Backup Level: Full Client: server-fd i486-pc-linux-gnu,debian,testing/unstable FileSet:

Re: [Bacula-users] increased speed dramatically by downgrading

2006-08-31 Thread Kern Sibbald
On Thursday 31 August 2006 19:49, Marco wrote: Maybe that helps: Yes, I can now see what you are complaining about. I would like to see a second Full save on version 1.38.11 to exclude the possibility that some other process was hogging your machine. I would also like to see a Full backup

Re: [Bacula-users] increased speed dramatically by downgrading

2006-08-31 Thread Marco
Just an idea: I did not build v1.38.11 and v1.38.8 myself but installed the debian packages. During the downgrade I noticed that there were changes concerning sqlite and sqlite3. I have not take a closer look on this because I don't understand much about it anyway. But maybe you could check

Re: [Bacula-users] increased speed dramatically by downgrading

2006-08-31 Thread Arno Lehmann
Hello, On 9/1/2006 12:51 AM, Marco wrote: Just an idea: I did not build v1.38.11 and v1.38.8 myself but installed the debian packages. During the downgrade I noticed that there were changes concerning sqlite and sqlite3. I have not take a closer look on this because I don't understand much