On Fri, 23 Nov 2018 17:35:06 -0800 Craig Hartnett <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi there, > > This email was going to be a (mild) complaint about restore times, but > then I noticed an odd thing: If I restore a directory with about 30 > full-size, full-resolution images, the directories in the path to the > directory I restore are all created within about 45-90 seconds, and > then the files start coming down at roughly the rate I might expect > for files of about 2 MB each. The files were all restored within > about 5 minutes. If I restore a single, small text file, it is > restored in seconds. > > Yet in both cases, the command does not exit for about 16-21 minutes, > which is what was going to lead me to complain. However, the actual > restore was done about as quickly as one would expect. > > In all test cases I used the following command: > > tarsnap -x -f ARCHIVE media/USER/PATH/DIRECTORY > tarsnap -x -f ARCHIVE > > media/USER/PATH/DIRECTORY/FILE.EXT > > Is it possible I'm doing something wrong, or is this a known bug? > There is nothing mentioned at > http://www.tarsnap.com/improve-speed.html that would seem to be about > this. I am guessing to some extent, but I would imagine that tarsnap is scanning to see if there is a more recent version of the file in the same archive (this is possible with tar, anyway, and I suppose that if you give the two names to tarsnap it will do the same). I wonder what happens if you use: tarsnap -x -k -f ARCHIVE media/USER/PATH/DIRECTORY
