-
- Lurker
- Posts: 1
- Liked: never
- Joined: Oct 08, 2017 9:30 am
- Full Name: Smic dias
- Contact:
[MERGED] New Server ReFS, i need an answer?
Hello,
got a new backup server with 64 GB RAM, local disks and about 60 TB of space, windows server 2016.
I read a lot of bad things about ReFS, are these problems fixed now from MS and Veeam?
What are the recommended settings for ReFS? Format the partition as 64k ? What to do else?
got a new backup server with 64 GB RAM, local disks and about 60 TB of space, windows server 2016.
I read a lot of bad things about ReFS, are these problems fixed now from MS and Veeam?
What are the recommended settings for ReFS? Format the partition as 64k ? What to do else?
-
- VP, Product Management
- Posts: 27147
- Liked: 2728 times
- Joined: Mar 30, 2009 9:13 am
- Full Name: Vitaliy Safarov
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Hello Smic, yes, 64k seems like a recommended value. Please review the latest 2 pages for more info on the current state with ReFS issues.
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 370
- Liked: 97 times
- Joined: Dec 13, 2015 11:33 pm
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
FC here as well, although we're running ok now with just a slower merge than I'd like compared to what it was to start withmkretzer wrote:We had it on FC. Does anyone have the same performance issues on non-ISCSI and non-FC disks?
-
- Novice
- Posts: 8
- Liked: 1 time
- Joined: Oct 13, 2017 7:37 pm
- Full Name: Jordan Desroches
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
I just looked up 1709, and problem fixed or not, it appears you need software assurance to gain access to it as a semi-annual build, so the back port is important to those of us without software assurance.
I'm just setting up and agonizing over my first VEEAM environment (moving from home grown backups). I'm going to give ReFS a shot and back off real real quick if it causes us trouble. I was kinda relying on it for efficient GFS retention.
I'm just setting up and agonizing over my first VEEAM environment (moving from home grown backups). I'm going to give ReFS a shot and back off real real quick if it causes us trouble. I was kinda relying on it for efficient GFS retention.
nmdange wrote:The phrase "backported" says to me the fix is part of the next build (1709) which will be out in the next few weeks. I definitely plan on testing backups on the new build, but I haven't really had the same issues other ppl have had. Anyone who's been having problems willing to try out the new release?
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 33
- Liked: 4 times
- Joined: Feb 29, 2012 1:42 pm
- Full Name: EamonnD
- Location: Dublin, Ireland
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Hi tsightler
Just for clarification
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem\RefsEnableLargeWorkingSetTrim = 1
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem\RefsNumberOfChunksToTrim = 32
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem\RefsDisableCachedPins = 1
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem\RefsProcessedDeleteQueueEntryCountThreshold = 512
are these numbers 32 and 512 Hex or decimal ?
I had a ReFS repo lock up on me today and want to implement these keys.
I'm complementing this with a windows update to catch the necessary ReFS KB's and switching off syntec full on the backup jobs.
Thanks
Eamonn
Just for clarification
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem\RefsEnableLargeWorkingSetTrim = 1
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem\RefsNumberOfChunksToTrim = 32
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem\RefsDisableCachedPins = 1
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem\RefsProcessedDeleteQueueEntryCountThreshold = 512
are these numbers 32 and 512 Hex or decimal ?
I had a ReFS repo lock up on me today and want to implement these keys.
I'm complementing this with a windows update to catch the necessary ReFS KB's and switching off syntec full on the backup jobs.
Thanks
Eamonn
-
- VP, Product Management
- Posts: 6015
- Liked: 2844 times
- Joined: Jun 05, 2009 12:57 pm
- Full Name: Tom Sightler
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Good question, those are decimal values.
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 26
- Liked: 12 times
- Joined: Jan 30, 2017 7:42 pm
- Full Name: Sam
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
After about a month of it working. My Veeam started up with merges and health checks for my file servers, causing it to lock out via CPU. After implementing the keys in this article: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/hel ... erver-2016 It started working again for me.
ReFS is still really slow, but it's stable again, for now. Still waiting on the backported fix the ReFS team is supposed to be putting together.
ReFS is still really slow, but it's stable again, for now. Still waiting on the backported fix the ReFS team is supposed to be putting together.
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 415
- Liked: 75 times
- Joined: Jun 09, 2015 7:08 pm
- Full Name: JaySt
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Is it perhaps possible for Veeam to create a KB article with the current status and best practices regarding the use of ReFS/Registry settings etc etc.
It's better than sending everyone off to a 43-page forum thread right?
It's better than sending everyone off to a 43-page forum thread right?
Veeam Certified Engineer
-
- Influencer
- Posts: 14
- Liked: 2 times
- Joined: Feb 02, 2017 2:13 pm
- Full Name: JC
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Is there anyone else still having stability/hard crashes with ReFS (not just performance issues)?
I am, although lessened with synthetic fulls turned off and concurrent tasks cranked down.
I'm hopeful that the ReFS backport will fix my hard crashes. Otherwise I'll have to dump my entire primary and secondary chains because I don't have space to keep them while I start new ones.
I am, although lessened with synthetic fulls turned off and concurrent tasks cranked down.
I'm hopeful that the ReFS backport will fix my hard crashes. Otherwise I'll have to dump my entire primary and secondary chains because I don't have space to keep them while I start new ones.
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 377
- Liked: 41 times
- Joined: Feb 03, 2017 2:34 pm
- Full Name: MikeO
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
@jimmycartrette I went from being stable for a week to stable for about a month. It still crashes but works.
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 60
- Liked: 19 times
- Joined: Dec 23, 2014 4:04 pm
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
This... Also, it would be nice if Gostev could reach out to the ReFS team for an update on the backport/patch.JaySt wrote:Is it perhaps possible for Veeam to create a KB article with the current status and best practices regarding the use of ReFS/Registry settings etc etc.
It's better than sending everyone off to a 43-page forum thread right?
Build 1709 is not a solution since it's a different branch with no in-place upgrade.
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31612
- Liked: 6762 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
I will check with them.
-
- Lurker
- Posts: 2
- Liked: 1 time
- Joined: Nov 02, 2012 2:14 pm
- Full Name: Hen Savelkoul
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Any update yet ?
-
- Lurker
- Posts: 2
- Liked: never
- Joined: Nov 15, 2017 4:31 pm
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Any news on this?
I also don't see a ReFS remark on the updates provided by microsoft november patch tuesday.
Can somebody confirm that the problems are gone with Windows Server 1709?
I also don't see a ReFS remark on the updates provided by microsoft november patch tuesday.
Can somebody confirm that the problems are gone with Windows Server 1709?
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 60
- Liked: 19 times
- Joined: Dec 23, 2014 4:04 pm
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Would like to test but since this needs a OS reinstall I would like some feedback from the ReFS team if the fix was backported in 1709.trenzif wrote:Can somebody confirm that the problems are gone with Windows Server 1709?
Anton, any news? Our merges are taking 10+ hours and getting desperate for a solution...
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 361
- Liked: 109 times
- Joined: Dec 28, 2012 5:20 pm
- Full Name: Guido Meijers
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
You guys are all running Windows core?
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 60
- Liked: 19 times
- Joined: Dec 23, 2014 4:04 pm
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Not me, running with desktop. I guess proxies are a good use case for core but I feel a desktop makes life easier when troubleshooting...Delo123 wrote:You guys are all running Windows core?
-
- Influencer
- Posts: 23
- Liked: 2 times
- Joined: Apr 04, 2017 8:42 am
- Full Name: Steven Bricklayer
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Hi guys,
For your information our REFS 3.0 volume crashed and came back as a RAW device during a painfull Veeam merge.
Microsoft confirmed the problem come from the file system and couldn't find a way to get our files back
For your information our REFS 3.0 volume crashed and came back as a RAW device during a painfull Veeam merge.
Microsoft confirmed the problem come from the file system and couldn't find a way to get our files back
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 55
- Liked: 9 times
- Joined: Apr 27, 2014 8:19 pm
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Same thing happened for one of our servers. Backups lost forever...
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 28
- Liked: 11 times
- Joined: Oct 31, 2016 6:27 pm
- Full Name: Thomas Raabo
- Location: infrastructure guy
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Any update?Gostev wrote:I will check with them.
Has this been fixed in 1709? When will the fix hit Windows 2016 1609
Where are we?
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31612
- Liked: 6762 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Looks like they had some changes in the team, I need to work with the different person now. I will update once I have something material to share.
-
- Lurker
- Posts: 2
- Liked: never
- Joined: Nov 15, 2017 4:31 pm
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
I got this information from the veeam support regarding Windows Server 1709:
>> Windows release #1709 has not been well tested yet as it was released just month ago. Moreover, it is not supported in Veeam B&R U2 and will break FastClone integration.
>> Windows release #1709 has not been well tested yet as it was released just month ago. Moreover, it is not supported in Veeam B&R U2 and will break FastClone integration.
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 95
- Liked: 18 times
- Joined: Jun 04, 2014 10:23 am
- Full Name: Alan ORiordan
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
I haven't been able to find the answer to this query.
Is 64K Vs 4096K unit size ONLY an issue for the repository server drive? How about the virtual disk partition's of the VM's themselves and the underlying Host Hyper-V VM storage partition?
Are there any issues with say an Exchange or File Server VM virtual drives being formatted with ReFS 4096 unit size?
Sorry if this has already been covered in this lengthly thread
This was a good post for the repository server:
https://www.virtualtothecore.com/en/ref ... kb-or-4kb/
Is 64K Vs 4096K unit size ONLY an issue for the repository server drive? How about the virtual disk partition's of the VM's themselves and the underlying Host Hyper-V VM storage partition?
Are there any issues with say an Exchange or File Server VM virtual drives being formatted with ReFS 4096 unit size?
Sorry if this has already been covered in this lengthly thread
This was a good post for the repository server:
https://www.virtualtothecore.com/en/ref ... kb-or-4kb/
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 73
- Liked: 9 times
- Joined: Oct 26, 2016 9:17 am
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
I must admit that I fail to see any advantages of running ReFS inside VMs... especially for a file server : you will be missing some ntfs only features (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReFS#Removed_features)Alan_ORiordan wrote:I haven't been able to find the answer to this query.
Are there any issues with say an Exchange or File Server VM virtual drives being formatted with ReFS 4096 unit size?
anyway the current problems are to the extent of my knowledge related to block cloning only so my guess is that there is no issues with in-guest refs for an exchange or a file server
just keep in mind that for FLR you will need to do the restores from the veeam console installed on a operating system with refs support
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 95
- Liked: 18 times
- Joined: Jun 04, 2014 10:23 am
- Full Name: Alan ORiordan
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Thanks, the only advantages I can see for a File Server is the end of the 255 file path limit and the added resilience. The new domain will be 100% Server 2016 so File Level Restores will be ok on that front but that did catch us out once before. I have never used disk compression, encryption or quotas which are the main missing features but thanks for the heads-up. I can now continue the build of the new domain feeling comfortable with the choices made.
-
- Influencer
- Posts: 17
- Liked: 3 times
- Joined: Oct 18, 2017 6:40 pm
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
Based on the size of this thread and the fact that myself and several overs are having an issue even with 64k allocation sizes (see veeam-backup-replication-f2/slow-backup ... ml#p244057), I would think it beneficial to remove/edit the KB article recommending REFS.
Many have stated that they're going back to NTFS, but the issue for us (and likely many customers) is that we don't have a large enough location to move the data so we can format the volume. Hoping there is a fix that addresses the issue very soon.
Many have stated that they're going back to NTFS, but the issue for us (and likely many customers) is that we don't have a large enough location to move the data so we can format the volume. Hoping there is a fix that addresses the issue very soon.
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 28
- Liked: 11 times
- Joined: Oct 31, 2016 6:27 pm
- Full Name: Thomas Raabo
- Location: infrastructure guy
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
I´m going all-in on microsoft right now on premier case.Gostev wrote:Looks like they had some changes in the team, I need to work with the different person now. I will update once I have something material to share.
If i do not get answer by tomorrow - I will bump it to Sev A and leave it there for 24/7 resolution.
This has gone on to long! omg!
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 48
- Liked: 8 times
- Joined: Jul 26, 2012 11:10 pm
- Full Name: DeMentor
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
I keep monitoring this post and it reassures me that I've made the right decision
I had nothing but issues with REFS and finally gave up on it and went back to NTFS.
Since I switched back to NTFS everything is working perfectly I really feel like REFS is still a Beta file system that needs to mature and have all of its issues resolved before I can consider it to keep important information like backups.
I had nothing but issues with REFS and finally gave up on it and went back to NTFS.
Since I switched back to NTFS everything is working perfectly I really feel like REFS is still a Beta file system that needs to mature and have all of its issues resolved before I can consider it to keep important information like backups.
-DeMentor
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 377
- Liked: 41 times
- Joined: Feb 03, 2017 2:34 pm
- Full Name: MikeO
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
OK this is getting confusing. Im still running the beta ReFS driver from 5 months ago. Now I see Windows 1709, is this the eqiv of 'R2' ??? Its a bit annoying that msft hasn't fully addressed this issue with ReFS yet. I DO have a ticket open with Microsoft. Still in a holding pattern.
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 415
- Liked: 75 times
- Joined: Jun 09, 2015 7:08 pm
- Full Name: JaySt
- Contact:
Re: REFS 4k horror story
quick reminder about the RefsVirtualSyntheticDisabled registry value. if i understand correctly, this disables fast clone functionality on ReFS volumes. I have not tried it myself.
If you like to switch due to fast-clone problems, It could be an option to not re-format a repository to NTFS but just keep data for a while and use ReFS without fastclone by setting this value. Right?
I still have hopes there will be a fix.... eventually...
If you like to switch due to fast-clone problems, It could be an option to not re-format a repository to NTFS but just keep data for a while and use ReFS without fastclone by setting this value. Right?
I still have hopes there will be a fix.... eventually...
Veeam Certified Engineer
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 65 guests