Hello. Thanks again.
> Yes, hardlinked backups pretty much destroy performance, mainly > because it destroys all locality of reference on the storage media > when files are slowly modified and get their own copies, mixed with > other 'old' files which have not been modified. But theoretically > that should only effect the backup target storage and not the server's > production storage. That is what surprised me when I did experiment with backups. If I move backup off from the production server (to another less loaded production server indeed), server that shuld be backed up starts to run fine while backups are created. I think it means that problem is not with vnode/dir caches.. At the other side the server who received backups became very slow. So the problem looks to be related to writes or file creation/hardlinking somehow... At the moment I do not have server with ZFS, but I will think in this direction. But I heard that ZFS has less performance than UFS, is it really like this? I mean I have seen benchmarks and system requirements, but would like to hear about your own experience. -- // cronfy _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
