Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1996 11:03:10 +0100 (CET) From: Werner Griessl <croot@btp1da.phy.uni-bayreuth.de> To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rdump slow solved Message-ID: <199612091003.LAA16976@btp1da.phy.uni-bayreuth.de> In-Reply-To: <199612090908.KAA22223@uriah.heep.sax.de> from J Wunsch at "Dec 9, 96 10:08:44 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> As Werner Griessl wrote:
>
> > > > DUMP: finished in 430 seconds, throughput 49 KBytes/sec
> > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ !!!!!
> > >
> > > I can't confirm this. What's your blocksize? What system is the
> > > remote TCP peer? Is the tape streaming?
> > >
> >
> > Blocksize is the default (10), remote system is a DEC-alpha 3000/600,
> > tape is a HP-DAT 35480 with local transfer-rate ~250 kb/sec .
>
> Do you get the same slow througput when using rsh/dd for the tape?
> What does GNUtar's ``-f remote:/dev/ice'' yield? Does increasing the
> blocksize e.g. to 32 improve anything?
>
> Which throughput would you get to /dev/null on the remote machine?
> Questions, questions, questions.
>
Thanks for the hints, Joerg !
Changing the blocksize to 32 was the solution .
Have now with "rdump 0uBbf 1000000 32 ....":
DUMP: finished in 79 seconds, throughput 283 KBytes/sec
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Werner
> --
> cheers, J"org
>
> joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE
> Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199612091003.LAA16976>