Peter Thomassen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote
on 01/16/2012 12:31:05 AM:
> On 01/11/2012 08:00 PM, Timothy J Massey wrote:
> > I would add this: 45 GB and 185,000 files is, in my opinion,
far from big.
> > I have a number of servers backing up hosts that are 5 to 10
times as big,
> > and bigger. and that is with 1 GHz anemic processors and 512
> > I think the answers that you're getting are correct: you're probably
> > of some sort of resource. But this is far from a normal situation.
> > little backup servers are able to do much much bigger hosts.
> > something fundamentally weird about your setup.
> Upgrading RAM from 128 to 512 MB solved that problem. However, not
> another one occurs with the same host. I'll look into it and start
> another thread, if necessary.
Wow: you were trying to do backups with 128MB
RAM? I thought *I* was mean with only using 512MB RAM! :)
In today's day and age, even 512MB is way too small.
It will work (and I have a *bunch* of servers with only 512MB RAM),
but more is certainly not going to hurt. And keep this in mind, too:
fsck takes a *lot* of RAM, and if you don't have it, and if your
filesystem needs it, you can't boot. I had that problem with one
of my servers with a 1TB drive, and had to upgrade to 2GB to get it back
up. Fortunately, I happen to be able to put my hands on an extra
2GB stick immediately. But if you're going to need it eventually,
you might as well use it from the beginning...