Re: Faster backups - possibly Solaris pipe buffer size
- From: Robert Lawhead <news0000.5.unixguru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 08:01:44 -0700
Yonah Russ wrote:
Atro Tossavainen wrote:Regarding whether to do encryption on the cpu or the drive; My guess is
"Yonah Russ" <yonah.russ@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
I want to speed up the backup- right now backing up 670GB+/- takesAveraging 30 MB/s doesn't sound half bad to me.
close to 6.5 hours.
LTO3 is rated at 80MB/s- I don't know how realistic that is but I'd
like to get as close as possible- there is certainly room for
improvement.
Is there a reason you're using compression on the CPU instead of
letting the tape drive do its own?
The compression was in a backup script I inherited (one that was used
for a previous tape drive)
I also thought about getting rid of it but the daily backup of this
machine is critical so I can't take the chance that taking out the
compression will cause the backup to not fit on one tape.
As it is, dd only reports partial blocks on the side writing to the
tape so I have no clue how much it is actually writing.
The tape compression is also enabled so I imagine that trying to see
how much space is taken on the tape is not going to be helpful in
determining whether or not the lzo compression is worth anything.
Any ideas on how to speed up the process? believe the pipe buffer sizeI have a hunch that your bottlenecks, if there are any, might be the
is hurting performance but I don't know of any way to change the size
of the buffer.
OpenSSL RC4 encryption and possibly the LZO compression on the Sun CPU.
Encryption is a must and RC4 seems to be one of the fastest algorithms
from what I see.
The LZO compression can change or even go away if I know that there is
something better or that it isn't necessary.
Thanks,
Yonah
--
Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at
Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish & / the University of Helsinki, Finland,
+358-9-19158939 UNIX Dinosaur / employs me, but my opinions are my own.
< URL : http : / / www . helsinki . fi / %7E atossava / > NO FILE ATTACHMENTS
that once the data have been encrypted, there remain few "patterns" in
data for the drive to compress. To achieve any compression, it would
have to precede encryption. You can confirm as seen below.
So if the drive itself doesn't offer acceptable encryption, your best bet
may be to send Joerg Schilling an RFE for "star". :-).
% wc -c genunix 3313904
% bzip2 -c < genunix | wc -c 1145071
% openssl rc4 -e < genunix | wc -c 3313920
% openssl rc4 -e < genunix | bzip2 -c | wc -c 3328981
% bzip2 -c < genunix | openssl rc4 -e | wc -c 1145087
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Faster backups - possibly Solaris pipe buffer size
- From: Yonah Russ
- Re: Faster backups - possibly Solaris pipe buffer size
- References:
- Faster backups - possibly Solaris pipe buffer size
- From: Yonah Russ
- Re: Faster backups - possibly Solaris pipe buffer size
- From: Atro Tossavainen
- Re: Faster backups - possibly Solaris pipe buffer size
- From: Yonah Russ
- Faster backups - possibly Solaris pipe buffer size
- Prev by Date: Re: stack size exceeds current limit
- Next by Date: Re: stack size exceeds current limit
- Previous by thread: Re: Faster backups - possibly Solaris pipe buffer size
- Next by thread: Re: Faster backups - possibly Solaris pipe buffer size
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|