Compression Performance costing 400% in time to backup
I was testing a File backup of about 14.3GBs across a Gigabit Ethernet connection to a new SAMBA server and was very disappointed in the performance. It was taking about 9 minutes to back up. After several days, I have come to the conclusion that the network is not the bottleneck
I changed my test so that the destination of the backup was to a separate SSD. The backup still took about 8.5 minutes. I changed the priority from Low to Normal with almost no difference. I then turned off compression (it was set at the default of normal) and that cut the time down to 2 minutes.
My conclusion is that turning on Normal compression is costing me over 400% in the time it takes to do a backup. That seems excessive. Is that expected?
Windows 8.1 Pro
Intel Core i7-3930K at 3.2 GHz
Memory: 16GB
True Image 2013
- Anmelden, um Kommentare verfassen zu können
I agree that the network could have been an impact. In fact, it was what I originally suspected. However, by changing the target to a local SSD (not what I would usually do), I bypassed the network and went to the fastest disk that I have. I did this to remove as much as I can the effect of writing out to a disk. It did not change the backup time difference much so the problem is with the performance of ATI compression. Also, there are no options between No compression (NONE) and normal (i.e. normal == low compression). The Normal compression is compressing the data by about 36% so it is doing an ok job there.
Long ago, I used to use compressed disks (ala windows) and its impact was usually barely felt... certainly nothing like a 400+% increase. That is what surprises me.
- Anmelden, um Kommentare verfassen zu können