Comprehensive data protection for all workloads
mmonroe
Enthusiast
Posts: 75
Liked: 3 times
Joined: Jun 16, 2010 8:16 pm
Full Name: Monroe
Contact:

Re: Backup Copy Jobs - Parallel Processing?

Post by mmonroe »

Actually no.. In our datacetner, comparing V8 with Update 3 to V9 with Update 1, and with the backup copy job unchanged, the time for our nightly job has been cut in more than half on the exact same hardware. A 2hr job has been running in 45-55min now on V9-Update1. I have not tested with the new feature to allow per-VM backup files yet.

Most of this thread was well prior to anyone even knowing that per-VM backups files was going to be a feature in an upcoming version so people were talking about VM's processing in parallel like then do in the main backup jobs.
Gostev
Chief Product Officer
Posts: 31460
Liked: 6648 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Backup Copy Jobs - Parallel Processing?

Post by Gostev »

mmonroe wrote:Interesting on this thread where it was claimed that there would be no performance improvements with "parallel vm processing" on backup copy jobs yet now its a big feature and improves performance in v9. I guess we told you so, but what do silly customers/users know. :D
Without per-VM backup files enabled, Backup Copy jobs do not use parallel processing at all :D and you should be able to easily see this from the job log. The benefits you are seeing are coming from removing "dead time" between processed VMs, and even more so from optimized metadata (VBM) handling... but VM processing itself is still sequential, just as before.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: andreidam, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 279 guests