Re: [Duplicity-talk] duplicity 0.7 slowness

[covici]

edgar.soldin--- via Duplicity-talk <address@hidden> wrote:

> 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

Well, it sped up duplicity up greatly, from 4 hours to walk the tree to
a total of 80 minutes!  Even though I started at a certain time it took
40 minutes for the backup to start, but after that it was very fast.
Thanks so much for this one.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         address@hidden