public inbox for gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [gentoo-amd64] Rsync server performance problem solved
@ 2007-08-05 10:13 Peter Humphrey
  2007-08-05 23:38 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Duncan
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Peter Humphrey @ 2007-08-05 10:13 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-amd64

A few months ago I described a problem in which my gateway box, acting as an 
rsync portage server to my desktop and portable boxes, was taking several 
minutes to create and transfer the file list. The transfers of files to 
synchronise the local portage database with that on the server worked just 
fine, however.

It turns out that the 256 MB of RAM in the server wasn't enough, since as soon 
as I put in another GB it just flew - about one or two seconds now for file 
list transfer, which is a factor of 50 or 100 better.

The box does run BOINC clients, but at nice 19, so I though that shouldn't be 
a problem. However, I now remember that my BOINC parameters included a 
leave-in-memory-while-inactive option, and I suppose that must have been it, 
though I don't know how the kernel would operate with that setting.

Hope someone finds this interesting.

-- 
Rgds
Peter.
Linux Counter 5290, Aug 93
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* [gentoo-amd64]  Re: Rsync server performance problem solved
  2007-08-05 10:13 [gentoo-amd64] Rsync server performance problem solved Peter Humphrey
@ 2007-08-05 23:38 ` Duncan
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Duncan @ 2007-08-05 23:38 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-amd64

Peter Humphrey <prh@gotadsl.co.uk> posted
200708051113.34894.prh@gotadsl.co.uk, excerpted below, on  Sun, 05 Aug
2007 11:13:34 +0100:

> It turns out that the 256 MB of RAM in the server wasn't enough, since
> as soon as I put in another GB it just flew - about one or two seconds
> now for file list transfer, which is a factor of 50 or 100 better.
> 
> The box does run BOINC clients, but at nice 19, so I though that
> shouldn't be a problem. However, I now remember that my BOINC parameters
> included a leave-in-memory-while-inactive option, and I suppose that
> must have been it, though I don't know how the kernel would operate with
> that setting.
> 
> Hope someone finds this interesting.

Yes, indeed.  Thanks much! =8^)


-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2007-08-05 23:41 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-08-05 10:13 [gentoo-amd64] Rsync server performance problem solved Peter Humphrey
2007-08-05 23:38 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Duncan

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox