[Box Backup] Housekeeping hogging the server

Jamie Neil boxbackup at fluffy.co.uk
Wed Oct 25 16:02:56 BST 2006


Ben Summers wrote:
> 
> On 25 Oct 2006, at 13:53, Jamie Neil wrote:
> 
>> Ben Summers wrote:
>>> In the meantime, do you really need to use encrypted backups? If you
>>> control both the server, the client, and they're both on a network you
>>> manage, wouldn't rsync be better?
>>
>> That's the conclusion I'm coming to. The boxbackup system is primarily
>> for offsite client backups, but I was hoping to use the same platform
>> for local servers too.
>>
>> At the moment it's a toss up between rsnapshot (rsync based using hard
>> links to save space) and rdiff-backup. I think rdiff-backup has the edge
>> because it can run on the backup server as a non root user.
> 
> If you did want to use Box Backup, you could tar the directories up. If
> they always have the same filename, then it should be nice and efficient
> on bandwidth and disc space.
> 
> However, I don't think the server should be using quite so much CPU.
> Mostly it'll be waiting for I/O. Could it be another of those lovely
> Linux and hardware disagreements?

It's possible, but it's running on hardware that we've had no problems
with in the past and it's actually a Xen guest so it's insulated to from
the hardware to some degree.

Now that I've removed the mail server account the CPU is right back down
to idle.

-- 
Jamie Neil | <jamie at versado.net> | 0870 7777 454
Versado I.T. Services Ltd. | http://versado.net/ | 0845 450 1254



More information about the Boxbackup mailing list