Restore/Copy To transfer rate

[krogerss]

Hi all, I was just wondering what is considered a decent/good transfer rate for copying a large folder (75GB) to another location. Basically instead of restoring to its original location, I was copying it to another location locally on the Veeam server. It seemed really slow as the rate was only about 21MB/s or so. Thanks.

[foggy]

Transfer rate would vary from environment to environment, depending on the backup storage and overall FLR topology.

[krogerss]

So would this be considered something on the "low" end?

[foggy]

Could you please describe your setup in more detail?

[krogerss]

Its a single server - Dell R520 running Server 2012 R2, 32 RAM, and 2 8-core Intel Xeon E5 2990 1.90 processors. Storage is local and is 6 3TB 7.2K RPM Near-Line SAS 6Gbps 3.5in in RAID 5. Veeam is version 8.0.0.2084 and is running in Network Mode (10Gb). One proxy and one repository on said server. I just copied a rather large folder - 75GB from a backup and placed it on this Veeam server since there was plenty of space. Transfer rate was about 21MB/s and it took a little over an hour. Thanks.

[foggy]

I'd say that in case of all-in-one installation the speed is decent. There are too many factors that affect FLR performance: the number files in this folder, backup method (forward/reverse incremental) and the length of the chain (restore from older increment would be slower), compression, storage optimization settings (block size)...

[krogerss]

Ok. The restore point used was a full backup file from 2 week ago (10 restore points currently in chain) with a compression level of "High" and is part of a forever forward incremental job. Any suggestions on anything I could change to increase recovery performance? However, we do copy our backups to tape each night so Reverse Incremental may not be an option. On a side note, is there a way to look at the transfer rates for previous restores? I'm looking at the history, but the log and statistics do not show this. Thanks for your help.

[foggy]

Decreasing level of compression would increase FLR performance. Yes, restore history lacks this information.

[krogerss]

Ok, I have decreased compression, but the difference is minimal. I do have one other question regarding restores. The restore in question was restored to the local Veeam machine. However, whenever restoring a rather large file or folder across the network, the speed is maybe between 3 and 10 MB/s. This seems awfully slow. However, the backups in my opinion run a decent speed depending on the type of backup and how many machines are included in it. Are restores generally a lot slower? Thanks.

[foggy]

There's not much sense in comparing backup and restore speeds, since they perform completely different actions, data flow differs, even involved components might be different.

[krogerss]

I guess my point is that there is no apparent network bottleneck. Just the restore performance is terrible. If we ever have to restore a considerable amount of data, we'll be down a while.

[foggy]

The bottleneck might be somewhere else (for example, the backups storage - FLR performs heavy random read).