| To: | Nicolas Kowalski <Nicolas.Kowalski@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Speed up xfsdump ? |
| From: | Bill Kendall <wkendall@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 13 Sep 2005 08:25:32 -0500 |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.63.0509131303010.6178@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <4325BA69.4070709@xxxxxxx> <20050912174223.51325.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050913123852.Z4874818@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.63.0509131303010.6178@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050727) |
Nicolas Kowalski wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Tim Shimmin wrote:On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 10:42:23AM -0700, Bryan J. Smith wrote:Bill Kendall <wkendall@xxxxxxx> wrote:Try the dump this way and see if performance improves: xfsdump -J -f /dev/nst0 -b 1048576 -d 8192 /raidAgreed. Play with the blocking/buffering options of xfsdump itself.My 2 cents FWIW.[...] Using your tips, I also tested with this: xfsdump -J -f /dev/nst0 -S -p 300 -b 262144 /raid At the end, I have: xfsdump: dump size (non-dir files) : 28364432208 bytes xfsdump: dump complete: 4643 seconds elapsed This gives : 6109074 bytes/secSo the results are almost identical whatever blocksize or number of dump files are specified to xfsdump... It might be helpful to determine if xfsdump is slow because of the way it's interacting with the tape drive, or if it's just slow in general on your filesystem. Try using "-f /dev/null" and see how it performs. You don't need to specify -d/-S or -b in this case. Bill |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Speed up xfsdump ?, Nicolas Kowalski |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Speed up xfsdump ?, Nicolas Kowalski |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Speed up xfsdump ?, Nicolas Kowalski |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Speed up xfsdump ?, Nicolas Kowalski |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |