[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness
From: |
edgar . soldin |
Subject: |
Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness |
Date: |
Thu, 28 Jul 2016 21:11:20 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 |
On 25.07.2016 13:02, Philip Jocks via Duplicity-talk wrote:
> Hej Aaron,
>
>> Am 25.07.2016 um 12:46 schrieb Aaron <address@hidden>:
>>
>> Hello Philip,
>>
>> On 2016-07-25 10:56, Philip Jocks wrote:
>>> Hej Aaron,
>>>>> Given your follow-up email, it would be good to rule out SSH as a cause.
>>>>> Can you please backup to a local folder (e.g. file:///tmp/dup_test) with
>>>>> both and see if there is still the time difference?
>> [...]
>>>> The command I run is
>>>> duplicity collection-status --archive-dir '/var/.duply-cache' --name
>>>> duply_zzz_local --encrypt-key XXXXXXXX --encrypt-key YYYYYYYY --sign-key
>>>> XXXXXXXX --verbosity '9' --gpg-options '--pinentry-mode=loopback
>>>> --compress-algo=bzip2 --bzip2-compress-level=9' --full-if-older-than 1W
>>>> --volsize 200 'file:///path/to/zzz_local'
>>>> time’s output:
>>>> 0.6: 0.41 real 0.28 user 0.03 sys
>>>> 0.7: 71.01 real 37.57 user 23.71 sys
>>>> It’s a single chain, full backup has 3 volumes, one incremental with 1
>>>> volume and one incremental with 317 volumes.
>>> have you been able to look into this or maybe even reproduce it?
>>
>> Apologies, I completely forgot about this -- I'm better with bugs or
>> Launchpad Answers.
>>
>> Can you please try dropping off all of your additional options and see if
>> the difference persists? I.e., what about:
>> duplicity collection-status 'file:///path/to/zzz_local'
>> with both versions (or whatever the minimum is that you need to make it run
>> -- I don't use collection-status much)? If that doesn't have the difference,
>> can you please put your options back in one by one to see which looks like
>> it is causing the issue?
>
> thanks for getting back to me. Haven’t thought about removing options, now
> it’s getting interesting, weirdly. Keeping all options except for „—name“ is
> very fast. Adding „—name duply_zzz_local“ already takes several seconds now.
> So I'd figure, that’s what is at fault?
>
does it keep being fast after recreating the archive dir?
..ede/duply.net
PS: Aaron reworked file selection lately. another user came up w/ a patch that
accelerates duplicity by magnitudes, maybe you want you try it?
https://code.launchpad.net/~mwilck/duplicity/0.7-series/+merge/301332
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, Philip Jocks, 2016/07/01
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, Philip Jocks, 2016/07/25
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, Aaron, 2016/07/25
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, Philip Jocks, 2016/07/25
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness,
edgar . soldin <=
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, covici, 2016/07/28
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, edgar . soldin, 2016/07/29
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, covici, 2016/07/29
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, edgar . soldin, 2016/07/29
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, edgar . soldin, 2016/07/29
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, covici, 2016/07/29
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, edgar . soldin, 2016/07/29
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, covici, 2016/07/29
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, covici, 2016/07/30
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness, Philip Jocks, 2016/07/31