Re: [SLE] Homebrew NAS device

From: Danny Sauer (suse-linux-e.suselists_at_danny.teleologic.net)
Date: 09/02/04

  • Next message: Danny Sauer: "Re: [SLE] IBM hard drive"
    Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 16:21:08 -0500
    To: SuSE List <suse-linux-e@suse.com>
    
    

    Joe wrote regarding '[SLE] Homebrew NAS device' on Thu, Sep 02 at 08:37:
    > Question:
    > If I were to build a NAS box using Linux, what would be the prefered protocol
    > for file transfer? Would rsync be fast enough? Or should I consider scripting
    > ftp or something else? I know smb is too slow for large amounts of data. I'm
    > wanting to do disk-to-disk backups for about 300GB. Thoughts?

    I use rsync for nightly snapshots of 6 machines comprising about 260GB of
    data - most of which is html pages and individual email messages (using
    Maildir). The whole process consists of making a hardlinked copy of the
    targed directory, then updating the target dir from the server root using
    rsync over ssh. Between the perl script that does the linking and the
    rsync step, the process takes about 3-4 hours most nights. Most of that
    delay is from rsync building an in-memory list of several million files,
    so it seems. I know that I can transfer that amount of data in a tarball
    quite a bit quicker.

    So, the answer somewhat depends on the data. If the data consists of several
    large files, then rsync will be great - though you probably want to initiate
    from the client side and run an rsync server on the NAS. If you need to
    move a whole lot of small files, then you may encounter less-than-stellar
    performance from rsync. If I didn't need rsync for other reasons, I'd
    probably just open up a netcat session on each side of the link and dump
    tar into / out of the pipe (that's amusing read out of context).

    As the other person said, NFS mounting the NAS and copying the files might
    work well, too, but there again it depends on your situation. If you're
    just doing a one-shot thing, a full blown network filesystem probably isn't
    the right choice. If you wanna update several times through the day, then
    NFS may be what you need. I dislike NFS for performance needs, though, so
    take that as you may. :)

    --Danny

    -- 
    Check the headers for your unsubscription address
    For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com
    Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
    Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
    

  • Next message: Danny Sauer: "Re: [SLE] IBM hard drive"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Using Command Line For Backups
      ... Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote: ... It works a lot better if the NAS supports an rsync daemon, ... There are other interesting options in the manpage - --delete is ...
      (uk.comp.sys.mac)
    • Re: rsync question
      ... directory on my nas; the command i'm using ... so rsync doesn't know that it's the same file. ... real cute default ...
      (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
    • rsync: Invalid argument (22) on copy to a Samba server share
      ... Copying from local to WSA: ... the file is copied to dest first run. ... Copying from local to NAS: ... rsync error: some files/attrs were not transferred ...
      (comp.os.os2.apps)
    • Re: rsync question
      ... directory on my nas; the command i'm using ... so rsync doesn't know that it's the same file. ... real cute default ...
      (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
    • Re: Distributed network RAID
      ... The NFS suggestion was based on just needing access to the data from ... Snapshot, rsync the snap over. ... As for the iscsi, check on sourceforge for linux and iscsi. ... Get crazy with iscsi and gfs or maybe nbd. ...
      (Ubuntu)