XenServer local storage on a T3500
-
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@DustinB3403 said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Are you backing up to a remote location or to a local NAS?
I ran my backup to an onsite NAS over the 1GB management interface.
If I bonded a few pairs together on the server for management (I have em to spare, probably should've) it likely would've gone way faster.
I have the same backup performance issues that many other people have with XS. I'm backing up to a NAS target over a 1 GB link I think my best throughput was like 35 Mb.
The NAS is a 8 drive Drobo Pro.
As another test, I setup a PC with a 5 TB SATA WD Red Drive created a share and the performance was the same. In the case of this single drive, I might have been hitting a one drive write throughput max, so I don't really count it's performance.
You need to mention the backup tool that you are using. XS doesn't have it's own backups and backup speed is determined by the tool, not the platform.
-
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
The NAS is a 8 drive Drobo Pro.
As another test, I setup a PC with a 5 TB SATA WD Red Drive created a share and the performance was the same. In the case of this single drive, I might have been hitting a one drive write throughput max, so I don't really count it's performance.
Drobo Pro is RAID 5/6. It's insanely slow. Even the B800fs is insanely slow and it is faster by a bit. With write expansion and parity overhead problems, it is very likely that the write speed of a Drobo will be slower than a single drive. At best it is expected to be only about 20% faster than a single drive and that would only be if there was no latency introduced by the parity system and on a Drobo, there definitely is.
-
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@DustinB3403 said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Are you backing up to a remote location or to a local NAS?
I ran my backup to an onsite NAS over the 1GB management interface.
If I bonded a few pairs together on the server for management (I have em to spare, probably should've) it likely would've gone way faster.
I have the same backup performance issues that many other people have with XS. I'm backing up to a NAS target over a 1 GB link I think my best throughput was like 35 Mb.
The NAS is a 8 drive Drobo Pro.
As another test, I setup a PC with a 5 TB SATA WD Red Drive created a share and the performance was the same. In the case of this single drive, I might have been hitting a one drive write throughput max, so I don't really count it's performance.
You need to mention the backup tool that you are using. XS doesn't have it's own backups and backup speed is determined by the tool, not the platform.
XO is what he's using. With XS 6.5 there have been numerous reported issues in the backup speed performance with XO. But due to some limitation / bug of XS 6.5
-
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@DustinB3403 said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Are you backing up to a remote location or to a local NAS?
I ran my backup to an onsite NAS over the 1GB management interface.
If I bonded a few pairs together on the server for management (I have em to spare, probably should've) it likely would've gone way faster.
I have the same backup performance issues that many other people have with XS. I'm backing up to a NAS target over a 1 GB link I think my best throughput was like 35 Mb.
The NAS is a 8 drive Drobo Pro.
As another test, I setup a PC with a 5 TB SATA WD Red Drive created a share and the performance was the same. In the case of this single drive, I might have been hitting a one drive write throughput max, so I don't really count it's performance.
You need to mention the backup tool that you are using. XS doesn't have it's own backups and backup speed is determined by the tool, not the platform.
XO
-
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@DustinB3403 said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Are you backing up to a remote location or to a local NAS?
I ran my backup to an onsite NAS over the 1GB management interface.
If I bonded a few pairs together on the server for management (I have em to spare, probably should've) it likely would've gone way faster.
I have the same backup performance issues that many other people have with XS. I'm backing up to a NAS target over a 1 GB link I think my best throughput was like 35 Mb.
The NAS is a 8 drive Drobo Pro.
As another test, I setup a PC with a 5 TB SATA WD Red Drive created a share and the performance was the same. In the case of this single drive, I might have been hitting a one drive write throughput max, so I don't really count it's performance.
You need to mention the backup tool that you are using. XS doesn't have it's own backups and backup speed is determined by the tool, not the platform.
XO
Right, there is a known problem that makes XO slow because of what it uses under the hood. Use Veeam and it will be fast, I'm sure. It's not an XS speed issue. It's a XAPI call speed issue that is leveraged by XO.
-
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@DustinB3403 said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Are you backing up to a remote location or to a local NAS?
I ran my backup to an onsite NAS over the 1GB management interface.
If I bonded a few pairs together on the server for management (I have em to spare, probably should've) it likely would've gone way faster.
I have the same backup performance issues that many other people have with XS. I'm backing up to a NAS target over a 1 GB link I think my best throughput was like 35 Mb.
The NAS is a 8 drive Drobo Pro.
As another test, I setup a PC with a 5 TB SATA WD Red Drive created a share and the performance was the same. In the case of this single drive, I might have been hitting a one drive write throughput max, so I don't really count it's performance.
You need to mention the backup tool that you are using. XS doesn't have it's own backups and backup speed is determined by the tool, not the platform.
XO
Right, there is a known problem that makes XO slow because of what it uses under the hood. Use Veeam and it will be fast, I'm sure. It's not an XS speed issue. It's a XAPI call speed issue that is leveraged by XO.
Right, I understand that - I've never blamed XO for that performance issue. But I'm curious how Dustin got 6.5 TB backed up using XO on v6.5 so quickly? OK I probably have a backup target performance bottleneck, but there are still tons of people complaining about slow XO based backups (again because of XAPI), yet Dustin had this great backup window.
Does Veeam support XenServer now? When did that happen?
-
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Does Veeam support XenServer now? When did that happen?
Has for a long time. Just not the way that you mean. Veeam has one existing product that works on XenServer and one new one just releasing. Both are agent-based Veeam backups.
-
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Does Veeam support XenServer now? When did that happen?
Has for a long time. Just not the way that you mean. Veeam has one existing product that works on XenServer and one new one just releasing. Both are agent-based Veeam backups.
Scott many people would say that is agent based (because it is) it would work on any hypervisor.
-
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Does Veeam support XenServer now? When did that happen?
Has for a long time. Just not the way that you mean. Veeam has one existing product that works on XenServer and one new one just releasing. Both are agent-based Veeam backups.
Oh you're talking about the EndPoint Protection (Free client).
It looks like they flushed that out to a full support suite now. Great, now there's a solution for XS with Veeam.
-
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Does Veeam support XenServer now? When did that happen?
Has for a long time. Just not the way that you mean. Veeam has one existing product that works on XenServer and one new one just releasing. Both are agent-based Veeam backups.
Oh you're talking about the EndPoint Protection (Free client).
It looks like they flushed that out to a full support suite now. Great, now there's a solution for XS with Veeam.
Yes, they have a free client (agent) and a non-free full feature agent as well now. Works on XS, works on KVM (which includes Scale and products like that and such.)
-
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Does Veeam support XenServer now? When did that happen?
Has for a long time. Just not the way that you mean. Veeam has one existing product that works on XenServer and one new one just releasing. Both are agent-based Veeam backups.
Oh you're talking about the EndPoint Protection (Free client).
It looks like they flushed that out to a full support suite now. Great, now there's a solution for XS with Veeam.
Yes, they have a free client (agent) and a non-free full feature agent as well now. Works on XS, works on KVM (which includes Scale and products like that and such.)
Well I would assume the agent will work pretty much anywhere. So, are they doing to do what AppAssure did with Replay and ditch the hypervisor integration and go straight full on agent?
-
I don't mind the agent based approach, but give me the iso to mount in a recovery VM as a part of the package, don't make me have to go out and find it.
-
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Does Veeam support XenServer now? When did that happen?
Has for a long time. Just not the way that you mean. Veeam has one existing product that works on XenServer and one new one just releasing. Both are agent-based Veeam backups.
Oh you're talking about the EndPoint Protection (Free client).
It looks like they flushed that out to a full support suite now. Great, now there's a solution for XS with Veeam.
Yes, they have a free client (agent) and a non-free full feature agent as well now. Works on XS, works on KVM (which includes Scale and products like that and such.)
Well I would assume the agent will work pretty much anywhere. So, are they doing to do what AppAssure did with Replay and ditch the hypervisor integration and go straight full on agent?
Same as StorageCraft as well. One agent per OS and you get every scenario.
-
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Does Veeam support XenServer now? When did that happen?
Has for a long time. Just not the way that you mean. Veeam has one existing product that works on XenServer and one new one just releasing. Both are agent-based Veeam backups.
Oh you're talking about the EndPoint Protection (Free client).
It looks like they flushed that out to a full support suite now. Great, now there's a solution for XS with Veeam.
Yes, they have a free client (agent) and a non-free full feature agent as well now. Works on XS, works on KVM (which includes Scale and products like that and such.)
Well I would assume the agent will work pretty much anywhere. So, are they doing to do what AppAssure did with Replay and ditch the hypervisor integration and go straight full on agent?
Same as StorageCraft as well. One agent per OS and you get every scenario.
With Red Hat products, you can just use the built in recovery stuff and it's just as good.
Edit: apparently Relax and Recover is on other distros as well.
-
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Does Veeam support XenServer now? When did that happen?
Has for a long time. Just not the way that you mean. Veeam has one existing product that works on XenServer and one new one just releasing. Both are agent-based Veeam backups.
Oh you're talking about the EndPoint Protection (Free client).
It looks like they flushed that out to a full support suite now. Great, now there's a solution for XS with Veeam.
Yes, they have a free client (agent) and a non-free full feature agent as well now. Works on XS, works on KVM (which includes Scale and products like that and such.)
I hate this. You of all people should know better than to claim it works on XS/KVM.
It is an agent inside the guest and knows absolutely dick about the hypervisor.
It does not work on XS/KVM. It works on the supported guest OS that happens to be running on any hypervisor.
-
@JaredBusch I made a similar statement above, it works inside of the VM, regardless of the Hypervisor.
It's agent based, not agentless.
The terms are very clear.
Agent Based - runs inside of the guest OS.
Agentless - Runs outside of the guest OS, generally on the hypervisor. -
@JaredBusch said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@scottalanmiller said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@Dashrender said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Does Veeam support XenServer now? When did that happen?
Has for a long time. Just not the way that you mean. Veeam has one existing product that works on XenServer and one new one just releasing. Both are agent-based Veeam backups.
Oh you're talking about the EndPoint Protection (Free client).
It looks like they flushed that out to a full support suite now. Great, now there's a solution for XS with Veeam.
Yes, they have a free client (agent) and a non-free full feature agent as well now. Works on XS, works on KVM (which includes Scale and products like that and such.)
I hate this. You of all people should know better than to claim it works on XS/KVM.
It is an agent inside the guest and knows absolutely dick about the hypervisor.
It does not work on XS/KVM. It works on the supported guest OS that happens to be running on any hypervisor.
And KVM has its own backup system built in.
-
Well, it does look like I messed up while adding the local storage. I'll just reinstall after I clear another problem child off my bench.
-
@travisdh1 said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Well, it does look like I messed up while adding the local storage. I'll just reinstall after I clear another problem child off my bench.
What was messed up during the installation?
-
@DustinB3403 said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
@travisdh1 said in XenServer local storage on a T3500:
Well, it does look like I messed up while adding the local storage. I'll just reinstall after I clear another problem child off my bench.
What was messed up during the installation?
Nothing during the installation. I'm thinking I added the local storage wrong and couldn't find how to undo what I did in an hour yesterday, it's faster to just wipe and redo it.
