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>