by kkuszek » Tue Jan 19, 2016 2:54 pm people like this post
I just started my first restore from tape since switching to v9 from v8. I need 1 file and as we know normal v8 is to read the whole tape. it seems to have such a low processing rate to me though. The restore has been running for 18 hours and is at 18%. 100 hours for a restore? processing is pretty steady around 23 MB/S but this is dumping to idle local disk array so I struggle to see why streaming from tape isn't saturating the lto drive speed or even coming closer than 10%. Funny enough since the job started I kicked off a daily incremental to tape and that's rockin on at 150MB/S while not changing the restore rate of the job in the other drive.
So other tape users - what kind of restore rates are you seeing and what's your configuration? Is this kind of processing rate typical to you?
by kkuszek » Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:23 pm people like this post
P.S., I included this in my last ticket. The tape drive is directly connected to the vmware host running veeam and passed through to the veeam VM. This is on a dedicated host with a 6 disk dedicated local raid 10 array for storage.
by kkuszek » Wed Jan 20, 2016 2:40 pm people like this post
Hi v.Eremin, This is a rather small environment so backup duty is entirely within 1 machine. It's just an essentials plus deployment, nothing huge. It's a single dell r710 running vmware, and veeam is the only vm on there with it. I actually have the HBA the tape drive is connected to added as a pass-through device because vmware does not support multi-lun targets strangely enough. The r710 has 6x 3.5in drive slots in the front I populated with 4tb hgst sas drives in raid 10.
by goletsa » Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:51 am 1 person likes this post
HP LTO4, SAS HBA, on the same machine, where veeam installed. Write was about 100MB\s on Veeam v8 But restore rate only 20MB\s on v9 (Restore files from tape, about 400 files 1-3GB per tape (750GB), 3 tapes contain 2.1TB, 3days to restore).
by mongie » Tue Feb 16, 2016 4:40 am people like this post
Trying to run tape backup jobs on a new V9 upgraded server.
This was slow in V8 and is just as slow in V9. 6Gb SAS conected LTO6 drive in Dell TL2000 library. I get write speeds of less than 20MB/s. Normally around 12MB/s. Target is the bottleneck... but I don't see why.
I'm wondering if there is anything I can do? Should I log a ticket with Dell or Veeam?
by v.Eremin » Tue Feb 16, 2016 8:28 am people like this post
What kind you job are you running? Files to tape or backups to tape one? What is used as a source for the tape job? Can you provide us with full bottleneck statistics (the one with percent distribution)? Thanks.
by kkuszek » Tue Feb 16, 2016 3:13 pm people like this post
What is the average size of the file?
I believe that is exactly what OP meant by their post. I interpreted that as each tape containing around 400 files, and they average between 1-3gb in size for each file with a total use of around 750gb per tape and the complete restore was 2.1TB in size.
by Dima P. » Tue Feb 16, 2016 4:37 pm people like this post
To clarify, are you backing files via File to tape job or backups via Backup to tape job? If it’s a file to tape job what is the average size of the files (just estimate for better understanding)? Thanks
by Lulworth » Tue Feb 16, 2016 5:12 pm people like this post
I am using File to Tape. I am copying to tape the backups made from Veeam to my storage area. These are the VBK, VIB and VRB files and vary in size between 10's of MB to 600GB in size so not a lot of small files.
by Dima P. » Tue Feb 16, 2016 6:39 pm people like this post
Guys, I’ve merged both performance report threads into one for tracking purposes. Support and QA teams will review all cases posted above.
To all newcomers. If you see the performance decrease in file to tape job, backup to tape job or restore from tape please open a support case and post the case ID – we will check it. So, please provide:
0. Support case ID 1. Background on your infrastructure setup (i.e. type of the library, how it's connected to tape proxy, generation of tape drives) 2. What type of tape job were you using during the performance testing (file to tape / backup to tape / file from tape restore / backup from tape restore) 3. Bottleneck stats from job details 4. Average size of the file and number of backed up/restored files (a rough estimate is good enough) 5. Any other useful information