[Dirvish] Dirvish speed and security

[Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda]

A Dimarts 27 Maig 2008, Paul Slootman va escriure:
> On Mon 26 May 2008, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote:
> > I'm using dirvish 1.2.1-1, from a debian etch. I have created my vaults
> > and configured and running the complete system. I have a nfs mount where
> > I put the backup. It simply works.
>
> Rsync tries to optimize for network traffic, at a cost of increased
> local disk activity / CPU load.  If, however, you fool rsync by using an
> NFS mount, rsync thinks it's a local disk and will do the usual high
> disk activity which will severely load the NFS network link. It's always
> advised to not use rsync on NFS mounts.

Ok,

take note. 

> Additionally, such network disk boxes are usually quite limited in CPU.
> So even if it would be possible to run rsync natively on such a system,
> that would probably not perform very well either.

I don't have rsync in that box ....

> I would recommend using a simple USB / firewire box directly connected
> to the system being backupped; that performs at least an order of
> magnitude better than an NFS-connected drive, in my experience.

Ok, but the box doesn't not have usb to connect a computer. So, I have only 
the network option.

> If you're stuck with the situation, you're best off using --whole-file
> as option to rsync. That means that rsync doesn't try to use the old
> version of the file to optimize the data transferred (reading the old
> file over NFS is already causing the data transferred to be 100%, even
> without the new data!).  Of course, if you have correctly entered the
> local hostname as the client name, then dirvish should automatically use
> --whole-file, but I don't see that in the ACTION: line you posted.
> What is the output of "uname -n" on that system? Is it "ris"?

yes is ris. 

> If there is a large number of files in the backup, you could also
> disable the indexes to prevent a pass with find to get the list of files:
>
> index: none

Ok, I hope they will not be needed.

> > Howeber, I have a very poor transfer rate. To create the init backup I
> > need two days to transfer about 90G, and some days, if we have a lot of
> >
> > Total file size: 130790723840 bytes
>
> This shows 130GB, not 90GB.

yes, you are right. home 90G and conf, backup wiki, etc the rest.

Regards,

Leo