Re: [Bacula-users] performance problems backing up ocfs2 clusters
Hi folks, thanks for your suggestions, I tried your tar suggestion and indeed it turns out that transfer rates drop to the dozens of kb/sec in one special directory stored on the ocfs2 filesystem. I'm now in contact with the ocfs2 devs on the users list to see if they have any suggestions. All the best, Uwe -- uwe.schuerk...@nionex.net phone: [+49] 5242.91- 4740 fax:-9722 Hauptsitz: Avenwedder Str. 55, D-33311 Guetersloh, Germany Registergericht Guetersloh HRB 4196, Geschaeftsfuehrer: Horst Gosewehr NIONEX ist ein Unternehmen der DirectGroup Germany www.directgroupgermany.de -- Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging. Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] performance problems backing up ocfs2 clusters
On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:24:22 +0100, Uwe Schuerkamp wrote: Hello folks, we're experiencing massive problems backing up an ocfs2 cluster filesystem mounted on SLES 10 SP2 machines located on a shared SAN storage). The cluster has 8 members, and we've already tried certain mount options (noatime et al.) in an attempt to improve performance, however bacula's transfer speeds drop down into the double kb / sec digits when it encounters directories which contain many small files (say about 20,000 per dir or so). look at Spool Attributes = yes (or even Spool data http:// www.bacula.org/en/rel-manual/Configuring_Director.html). you can also try to make little test how long it takes to tar the same files. something like tar -cf /dev/null path (ok i'm not an advanced tar user ...) . maybe ocfs2 is the bottleneck as it (maybe) has to communicate the reads with the other nodes? - Thomas -- Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Performance problems in migration from disk to tape
On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 10:05 +0200, Ari Suutari wrote: Hi, My configuration is roughly like this: I back up about 10 hosts to disk volume using bacula and migrate the backups to tape once a week. Backups work ok, the resulting volume file on disk is currently about 25 Gb. I have also some backups going directly to tape, performance there is also ok. But the weekly migration job, which moves backups from disk volume to tape is really slow. For example: Elapsed time: 7 mins 14 secs SD Files Written: 2 SD Bytes Written: 3,913,732 (3.913 MB) A relatively small backup job, only a couple of megabytes took more than 7 minutes. When I looked at the machine, it was doing heavy disk io, tape is mostly idle. This sounds a little bit similar as issue discussed here earlier: http://www.mail-archive.com/bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg31142.html I wonder if there was any solution, configuring things differently maybe ? Hello, This is know problem in bacula versions up to 2.4.4 It is fixed in recent beta 2.5.28-b1 We are running the same Setup (just Copy instead of Migrate) 30 Clients CopyDiskToTape weekly full backups (~600GB) takes 3 hours CopyDiskToTape daily incr backups (~30GB) takes 10 minutes Regards Ulrich Regards, Ari Suutari -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users -- Ulrich Leodolter ulrich.leodol...@obvsg.at OBVSG -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Performance problems in migration from disk to tape
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:05:53AM +0200, Ari Suutari wrote: Hi, My configuration is roughly like this: I back up about 10 hosts to disk volume using bacula and migrate the backups to tape once a week. Backups work ok, the resulting volume file on disk is currently about 25 Gb. I have also some backups going directly to tape, performance there is also ok. But the weekly migration job, which moves backups from disk volume to tape is really slow. For example: Elapsed time: 7 mins 14 secs SD Files Written: 2 SD Bytes Written: 3,913,732 (3.913 MB) A relatively small backup job, only a couple of megabytes took more than 7 minutes. When I looked at the machine, it was doing heavy disk io, tape is mostly idle. This sounds a little bit similar as issue discussed here earlier: http://www.mail-archive.com/bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg31142.html I wonder if there was any solution, configuring things differently maybe ? What version of Bacula are you running? Which OS? What kind of hardware do you have? :) -- Pasi -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Performance problems in migration from disk to tape
Hi, What version of Bacula are you running? Which OS? What kind of hardware do you have? :) Sorry, I forgot those: Bacula 2.4.4, FreeBSD 7.1, disks are SATA disks and tape is HP DAT160. Ari S. -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Performance problems in migration from disk to tape
Hi, This is know problem in bacula versions up to 2.4.4 It is fixed in recent beta 2.5.28-b1 This sounds great ! Are there any possibilities that the fix might be seen in future 2.4 versions, or should I just upgrade to beta versions ? Using beta versions is tempting, because I would like to use Copy jobs also. Ari S. -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Performance problems in migration from disk to tape
On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 10:58 +0200, Ari Suutari wrote: Hi, This is know problem in bacula versions up to 2.4.4 It is fixed in recent beta 2.5.28-b1 This sounds great ! Are there any possibilities that the fix might be seen in future 2.4 versions, or should Dont think so, there are major changes. I just upgrade to beta versions ? Using beta versions is tempting, because I would like to use Copy jobs also. upgrade if you can't wait :-) and compilation from source is no problem, otherwise wait until version 3.0.0 is released. http://www.mail-archive.com/bacula-de...@lists.sourceforge.net/msg03801.html Ulrich Ari S. -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users -- Ulrich Leodolter ulrich.leodol...@obvsg.at Oesterreichische Bibliothekenverbund und Service GmbH Bruennlbadgasse 17/2A, A-1090 Wien Fax +43 1 4035158-30 Tel +43 1 4035158-21 Web http://www.obvsg.at -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Performance problems
On 11/15/06, Manuel Staechele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello,i want restore a simple file from a FULL job which is not that big.and it took 10 hours to build the directory-tree.job informations:Type | Level | JobFiles | JobBytes| JobStatus | B| F |913,065 |17,818,106,395 | T--i have already checked if there are all recomented indexes in thedatabases. but they are all there. Usually this is a problem with the database but I see that you have checked the indexes. I have a few questions. Is the pc with the database installed recent? What version of bacula are you running? Did the hard drive thrash continuously for the time it was building the tree? What was your cpu load during the tree build? database: mysqlbacula-director and bacula-sd are not on the same server This should only make a difference for the actual restore and not the build tree step.John - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
