Slow backups with scrips???

[jasongoldtech]

I’m having some issues with scripting back-ups to run from firewire hard drives on my Mac.

 

If I manually start a back-up, they run at an average of 1GB/min, usually 1000-1200MB/min. On the other hand, if I script them to run, at night while I’m sleeping for example, it runs at an average of 500-600MB/min, which being about half-speed greatly slows down what I’m planning to do. I’m wondering if there’s some logical reason for this or some way to debug this.

 

Also from what I know, the slower it backs up, the more tape space it uses, which makes me even more hesitant to schedule anything to run at night if it’s going to continue to go so slowly.

 

I try to have back-ups going throughout the night, but then when I come in the next day, it’s only halfway through what it would normally have gotten fully done with if I were here manually starting the backups.

 

I am running Retrospect Version 6.1.230

with Atto compatible SCSI driver for Mac osx 10.4.9 Mac G4 2Gb ram .

 

Please let me know ASAP if there’s any advice or anything to help me with this.

 

Thanks!

 

Best,

 

Elizabeth Davis

[twickland]

If I manually start a back-up, they run at an average of 1GB/min, usually 1000-1200MB/min.

Do you mean by this that you are manually launching your backup script from the Run menu, or that you are running an Immediate Backup?

 

If the latter, are there any differences in the options you have selected for the scheduled script? In particular, have you selected "Data compression in software?" This could cause things to slow down if your tape drive doesn't have hardware compression. (By the way, what kind of tape drive are you using?)

 

On the other hand, if I script them to run, at night while I’m sleeping for example, it runs at an average of 500-600MB/min

Is there anything running on your computer at night, such as some number-crunching program, screensaver, virus scan, etc.? This would be more of an issue with slower hardware. What kind of host computer are you using?

 

Also from what I know, the slower it backs up, the more tape space it uses

If the data rate is slow enough that the tape has to constantly backhitch, you will use somewhat more tape. On the other hand, tape can be pretty cheap, depending on what type you're using, so this may not be a huge issue for you. Even the slow data rates you cite would be reasonably fast for a typical backup of networked clients, which is something many of us perform to tape backup sets.

 

I am running Retrospect Version 6.1.230

with Atto compatible SCSI driver for Mac

Specifically, what ATTO card, what firmware, and what version of the ATTO driver?

[jasongoldtech]

Thank you for your response!

 

In answer to your questions, when I say "manually start" I mean I'm running an Immediate Backup. There aren't any different options in my scheduled script as I literally just save the Immediate window in order to schedule my script. I checked and Compression is off, so that's not the issue.

 

My tape drive is a Lib 81 AIT-5 (SDX-1100).

 

As far as things running on the computer at night, there is definitely a screensaver going. There's no virus scan, but I believe there is scheduled maintenance running at 3:00am (this is a regular Mac thing, and only runs for approximately 15 min). Even things I script to run at 1:00am, or the things running later, like 6:00am, however, still go at half-speed.

 

My host computer is a G4 Dual 1GHz Power Pac, 2GB RAM.

 

The tape I'm using is not very cheap at all (AIT-5, $50-70 per tape).

 

My ATTO card is a UL4D. There is nothing else on the SCSI chain. The driver is 4.3.1, firmware date is Feb 18 2008.

 

So you know, I tried a test of running my backup straight to a hard drive on the computer as opposed to a tape. When I did an Immediate Run, it went at ~1100MB/min. I then tried scripting it to run immediately (i.e. scheduling a script for a minute later), and this one actually did go fast. But when I scripted it to run several hours later (at midnight or something) it again went an average of 485MB/min.

 

As additional data, I did also try a test to tape of scheduling a script for just a minute later, and this also was fast (1000+MB/min), so it seems to be only a problem when I schedule them for hours in advance.

 

I did also to try schedule scripts to run to tapes hours in advance during the day, and this went slowly as well, so I don't think it's a daytime/nighttime issue.

 

Any more ideas?

[CallMeDave]

Retrospect doesn't care if it's night or day, North America or South America, running unattended or interactively.

 

My host computer is a G4 Dual 1GHz Power Pac, 2GB RAM

 

What where are your Sources? Are you pulling data off a network, or is everything local to the host machine?

[jasongoldtech]

Thanks. I have used both Firewire directly connected and network storage (AFP).

 

My Firewire drives can copy at about 23Mps, and over the network I can usually get about 30Mps. It really just looks to be Retrospect's scheduled tasks are taking longer, but for the life of me, I can't figure out why this would be.

 

 

(CPU and RAM all seem to be fine and don't seem to be linked to the problem.)

 

 

[CallMeDave]

there is definitely a screensaver going

So turn it off, and allow the monitor to sleep instead.

 

It really just looks to be Retrospect's scheduled tasks are taking longer

Start an Immediate backup, then select "Run Unattended" from the Run menu. The cursor will change, and for all intents and purposes Retrospect will be behaving the same way as it does when it runs a Scheduled Script.

 

But since you have already proven that it's not scheduled tasks that are the issue ("I ... tried... scheduling a script for a minute later), and this one actually did go fast."), there must be something else going on when you're not looking.

 

I've heard that Gremlins are actually pretty nice, as long as you don't feed them after Midnight...

 

Dave

[jasongoldtech]

Thank you for your response.

 

So, I tried "run unattended," and it definitely appears to go slower with "run unattended" checked and faster with "run interactive" checked regardless of whether I'm running an immediate backup or a scheduled script.

 

The question now is either how can I make the scheduled scripts run interactively (as this should make them go faster) OR why is the unattended running slow, and can I somehow fix that?

 

(NOTE: I also have another computer [similar G4, using Leopard as opposed to Tiger] running Retrospect with a single AIT-5 drive (similar set-up to the one earlier detailed), and it too showed the same results when I changed the backup to running interactively or unattended [sped up when interactive, slowed down when "unattended"].)

 

Do you know what's happening in the background when it's running unattended?

[jasongoldtech]

I just checked something else and discovered that when I scheduled scripts to restore overnight, they restored at full speed - i.e. 1000+MB/min.

 

Any ideas why it would be fast on restoration from scripts and not on backing up? I'm still trying to debug this and make it go faster when I script back-ups to run.