Comprehensive data protection for all workloads
jasonede
Service Provider
Posts: 69
Liked: 11 times
Joined: Jan 04, 2018 4:51 pm
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by jasonede »

What's the news on other releases with XFS and relinks?

I see that XFS and relink is supported in RedHat 8 and Centos 8 and can't find reference to it being experimental in the documentation.

ferrus
Veeam ProPartner
Posts: 279
Liked: 40 times
Joined: Dec 03, 2015 3:41 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by ferrus »

Working great here on Ubuntu 20.04.
(I know it's not supported yet - but it's the third data copy, at a DR site, and 18:04 just wouldn't install).

Just tested with modest amounts of data so far, will try and scale it up to around 30TB soon, to see how it compares with ReFS.

zyrex
Influencer
Posts: 23
Liked: 3 times
Joined: Jan 21, 2018 7:55 pm
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by zyrex »

@ferrus, could you maybe tell me about your process? I'm running 19.10 and can not get it to work..

ferrus
Veeam ProPartner
Posts: 279
Liked: 40 times
Joined: Dec 03, 2015 3:41 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by ferrus »

As far as I can tell, there's only two steps to enable it.
Firstly, using the reflink argument during the initial format:

Code: Select all

mkfs.xfs -b size=4096 -m reflink=1,crc=1 /dev/sda1
from https://helpcenter.veeam.com/docs/backu ... ml?ver=100

And enabling XFS Fast Clone on the repository, when you add it to Veeam:
(I actually missed this step, because it's automatic with ReFS)

Image
from https://lnx.gable.it/2020/03/01/addicti ... -on-veeam/

There are additional firewall steps on the page above (albeit for CentOS). I didn't have to do those, but it may be worth looking at on your installation.

tsightler
VP, Product Management
Posts: 5837
Liked: 2665 times
Joined: Jun 05, 2009 12:57 pm
Full Name: Tom Sightler
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by tsightler » 1 person likes this post

zyrex wrote: Mar 11, 2020 1:25 pm@ferrus, could you maybe tell me about your process? I'm running 19.10 and can not get it to work..

@zyrex Did you run new full backups after you enabled XFS block clone in the settings? Backups created prior to this setting cannot be used for block cloning because they'll have been created without align blocks. Otherwise, the overall process is very straightforward, make sure the volume has reflink/crc enabled, and make sure the repository setting is enabled, there are no additional requirements and I'd strongly suggest contacting support if you are still having issues.

tsightler
VP, Product Management
Posts: 5837
Liked: 2665 times
Joined: Jun 05, 2009 12:57 pm
Full Name: Tom Sightler
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by tsightler »

jasonede wrote: Mar 11, 2020 8:44 am What's the news on other releases with XFS and relinks?

I see that XFS and relink is supported in RedHat 8 and Centos 8 and can't find reference to it being experimental in the documentation.
You can find the reference in the documentation here:

https://helpcenter.veeam.com/docs/backu ... =100#linux

The specific quote is:
Supported distributions: Ubuntu 18.0.4 or later. For other distributions, Fast Clone support is experimental.
Basically experimental means that QA has not fully tested it but we don't see any reason it would not work and support will still work with you if you use it. I've been personally hammering block clone on CentOS 8 for a few months now and I've seen no critical issues, just a few minor things with memory allocation during peak load. I still think Ubuntu 20.04 will be my preferred choice due to a much newer kernel with all the XFS enhancement, but, at least so far, CentOS 8 seems pretty solid for me. Only time and scale will actually tell though.

zyrex
Influencer
Posts: 23
Liked: 3 times
Joined: Jan 21, 2018 7:55 pm
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by zyrex »

tsightler wrote: Mar 11, 2020 4:53 pm @zyrex Did you run new full backups after you unabled XFS block clone in the settings? Backups created prior to this setting cannot be used for block cloning because they'll have been created without align blocks. Otherwise, the overall process is very straightforward, make sure the volume has reflink/crc enabled, and make sure the repository setting is enabled, there are no additional requirements and I'd strongly suggest contacting support if you are still having issues.
Thanks, that's a good point - I haven't ran a new full backup after enabling the XFS fast clone on the repository... I guess that's the next step :) I've doublechecked that reflink/crc is enabled on the volume so that should be fine now.

DonZoomik
Veeam Legend
Posts: 252
Liked: 66 times
Joined: Nov 25, 2016 1:56 pm
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by DonZoomik »

I had alignment option enabled while creating repo about a month ago with v9.5 (I knew that XFS support was coming). Does this help retroactively?

c.schulzejn
Enthusiast
Posts: 52
Liked: 3 times
Joined: Oct 24, 2018 8:22 am
Full Name: Christoph Schulze
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by c.schulzejn »

What are the Pros and Cons of xfs+nfs vs. ReFS+iscsi?

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 28177
Liked: 4997 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by Gostev » 1 person likes this post

There are no differences from Veeam perspective.

tsightler
VP, Product Management
Posts: 5837
Liked: 2665 times
Joined: Jun 05, 2009 12:57 pm
Full Name: Tom Sightler
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by tsightler » 3 people like this post

c.schulzejn wrote: Mar 16, 2020 12:49 pm What are the Pros and Cons of xfs+nfs vs. ReFS+iscsi?
I'd say this question is a little confusing because of the mix of NFS and iSCSI. Both XFS and ReFS are filesystems for block devices (i.e. disks) which can be presented via any block device protocol (SATA, SAS, RAID, FC, iSCSI, etc). NFS is a network filesystem and is really unreleated to XFS, although XFS could be a backing device for an NFS share, as can pretty much any filesystem. If you want to use block clone the question is probably more accurately what are the pros and cons of XFS+iSCSI vs ReFS+iSCSI.

With that question, as @Gostev notes, there's little functional difference from the Veeam perspective between these two. From the user perspective the obvious differences are Windows vs Linux, and the fact that ReFS block clone support has been out for quite a while, so we know it mostly works OK, although there are cases where it's not perfectly stable, while XFS block clone support is brand new and lightly deployed in production so, while we don't expect issues, we also don't have a lot of real world history on it's overall stability for production scale environments as that only comes with time.

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 28177
Liked: 4997 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by Gostev »

Ah, my bad - I missed the NFS part. Tom is right!

Ejdesgaard
Service Provider
Posts: 41
Liked: 6 times
Joined: Aug 24, 2012 11:59 am
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by Ejdesgaard »

When can we expect full support for RHEL-8 and/or CentOS-8 for xfs reflink ?

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 28177
Liked: 4997 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by Gostev »

This will largely depend on how many customers will adopt it under experimental support terms in the coming months, and what results do they see. We will prioritize the official support for different distros based on actual adoption rates.

lasseoe
Service Provider
Posts: 63
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Dec 17, 2012 4:39 pm
Full Name: Lasse Osterild
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by lasseoe »

Have you come across any issues with XFS & Fast Clone yet? Any reported issues on CentOS/RHEL/OEL 8 ?

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 28177
Liked: 4997 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by Gostev » 2 people like this post

No, we did not have any issues reported thus far.

pedroa
Lurker
Posts: 1
Liked: never
Joined: Nov 28, 2019 11:02 am
Full Name: pa
Contact:

[MERGED] XFS Reflink repository sizing recommendations

Post by pedroa »

Hi all,

I'm looking for best practices when deploying a Linux XFS with reflink enabled.

Windows ReFS has a recommendation of 1GB per 1TB of stored data, what would be in this case using XFS with Reflink?

thanks,

Pedro

nitramd
Veeam Legend
Posts: 296
Liked: 81 times
Joined: Feb 16, 2017 8:05 pm
Contact:

Re: XFS Reflink repository sizing recommendations

Post by nitramd »

Hello Pedro.

I'd suggest taking a look at this post: veeam-backup-replication-f2/v10-xfs-all ... 65222.html

It may not answer your question directly but it might give you more information about XFS in general.

soncscy
Veeam Legend
Posts: 361
Liked: 176 times
Joined: Aug 04, 2019 2:57 pm
Full Name: Harvey Carel
Contact:

Re: [MERGED] XFS Reflink repository sizing recommendations

Post by soncscy » 1 person likes this post

pedroa wrote: Mar 31, 2020 9:46 am Hi all,

I'm looking for best practices when deploying a Linux XFS with reflink enabled.

Windows ReFS has a recommendation of 1GB per 1TB of stored data, what would be in this case using XFS with Reflink?

thanks,

Pedro
Hi Pedro,

IIRC, that recommendation for ReFS is outdated and reflected only a state in time of ReFS. Nowadays, normal repository sizing should be fine. (Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong here)

But, I think XFS is still kind of new and it's harder to say what the "ideal" setup should be. My take is that assuming no XFS bugs, normal repository sizing ought be fine. I have relegated XFS to non-essential VMs for my clients just because even though it's been in the stable branch for a few distros for a few years now, I want a few more years under the belt before I 'm ready to consider it prime time.

So, size it normally, but I advise don't go 100% in on XFS just yet.

paul.hambleton
Service Provider
Posts: 28
Liked: 6 times
Joined: Jan 29, 2019 12:12 pm
Full Name: Paul Hambleton
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by paul.hambleton »

Is there any benefit to enabling Fast Clone if Veeam Encryption is enabled?

My assumption is that encryption means there are no common blocks therefore no point using Fast Clone.
Veeam Service Provider Console
Server Version 4.0.0.4877
Web UI Version 4.0.0.4877

Veeam Server 10.0.0.4461 P1

DerOest
Enthusiast
Posts: 60
Liked: 28 times
Joined: Oct 30, 2015 10:10 am
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by DerOest » 1 person likes this post

paul.hambleton wrote: Is there any benefit to enabling Fast Clone if Veeam Encryption is enabled?

My assumption is that encryption means there are no common blocks therefore no point using Fast Clone.
Veeam can look inside/"behind" the encryption - it knows which metadata/datablocks inside the encrypted backup-files correspond to which source-datablocks.
Therefor Fast Clone works just perfectly fine with encrypted backups!

> encryption means there are no common blocks
That is the whole point of Fast Clone - instead of copying to new blocks, just reuse existing blocks - make as few "no common blocks" as possible. As above, it works because Veeam itself performs the encryption and knows what is what.

crackocain
Service Provider
Posts: 202
Liked: 19 times
Joined: Dec 14, 2015 8:20 pm
Full Name: Mehmet Istanbullu
Location: Turkey
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by crackocain »

Hello

What is the Veeam best practise block size for XFS? As you know ReFS best practise block size is 64K.

tsightler
VP, Product Management
Posts: 5837
Liked: 2665 times
Joined: Jun 05, 2009 12:57 pm
Full Name: Tom Sightler
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by tsightler » 1 person likes this post

Unless something has changed very recently the XFS on-disk format itself supports block sizes up to 64K, but there is a huge caveat, the actual XFS implementation on Linux limits the maximum supported block size = kernel page size (documented in the mkfs.xfs man page for the -b option). On x86/amd64 architectures the Linux kernel page size is 4K, so the effective maximum supported block size for XFS is 4K and is the recommend best practice as well as what most systems will use by default. For the newest distros with latest xfs-progs packages (RHEL8, Ubuntu 20.04) the mkfs.xfs command also sets the crc=1 and reflink=1 options by default as well so they will "just work" with the correct settings out-of-the-box, but you can always pass them specifically if you just want to be sure.

kspare
Enthusiast
Posts: 31
Liked: 4 times
Joined: Nov 29, 2018 1:18 am
Full Name: Kevin Pare
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by kspare » 1 person likes this post

Just curious, now that some people are 6 months into unbuntu and xfs, is there a performance gain to be had? We have a customer running a windows 2016 refs/iscsi proxy/repo and it works ok. But as we setup other customers it would be nice not to have to buy that windows license....

So is unbuntu/iscsi/xfs the way to go now?

mweissen13
Service Provider
Posts: 63
Liked: 31 times
Joined: Dec 28, 2017 3:22 pm
Full Name: Michael Weissenbacher
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by mweissen13 » 4 people like this post

After 4 months of use I can tell that XFS seems to fragment much less than ReFS, which translates to a better performance, especially for merges on spinning disks, in the long term. In my book it seems to be pretty stable too. On flash storage the difference will probably be negligible.

ferrus
Veeam ProPartner
Posts: 279
Liked: 40 times
Joined: Dec 03, 2015 3:41 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by ferrus » 2 people like this post

kspare wrote: Oct 16, 2020 4:38 pm Just curious, now that some people are 6 months into unbuntu and xfs, is there a performance gain to be had? We have a customer running a windows 2016 refs/iscsi proxy/repo and it works ok. But as we setup other customers it would be nice not to have to buy that windows license....

So is unbuntu/iscsi/xfs the way to go now?
It's hard to compare performance for us.
The figures we have actually show XFS to be better - but the sites where we use ReFS/XFS, have different hardware and data sets, making the comparison difficult.
I can certainly say that we haven't had any performance issues with XFS, and the data rates and fast clones we have with it are similar to what we'd expect with ReFS.

What has been a huge difference for us, is the stability.

It took years for ReFS to become stable with acceptable performance, necessitating several rebuilds and some data loss.
XFS/Reflink has been rock solid for us, since it's first introduction to Veeam. And we started using it a few weeks after release.

We still only have it at our DR site - but as soon as Veeam release the touted support for physical Linux proxies/Direct SAN support, I'll certainly rebuild all of our Windows Proxy+Repo servers to use it.
The saving of Windows licenses makes it an even better option. I also like having the backup data on a different OS platform, from a security point a view.

crackocain
Service Provider
Posts: 202
Liked: 19 times
Joined: Dec 14, 2015 8:20 pm
Full Name: Mehmet Istanbullu
Location: Turkey
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by crackocain »

Hello

I want to ask Oracle RMAN Plugin or SAP Backint could use XFS Reflink?

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 28177
Liked: 4997 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by Gostev »

No, they can't. Fast cloning is available for image-level backups only, which plug-in backups are not - they are streaming backups.

crackocain
Service Provider
Posts: 202
Liked: 19 times
Joined: Dec 14, 2015 8:20 pm
Full Name: Mehmet Istanbullu
Location: Turkey
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by crackocain »

Hello everyone

I want to ask what is the Veeam best compression settings and storage optimization settings with XFS reflink.

Veeam compressed and write blocks with defaults, Optimal compression and Local Target (1MB chunks)
So Veeam analyze 1MB and compressed 512K (if %50 compression)
When compression enable blocks alignment always changing.
I wonder if no compression setting enabled gain better block clone ratio? Yes compression is good with short retention but when the purpose is 5 year backup retention with same XFS repository, i think better block clone ratio more important. Am i think right way this subject?

Thank you.

tsightler
VP, Product Management
Posts: 5837
Liked: 2665 times
Joined: Jun 05, 2009 12:57 pm
Full Name: Tom Sightler
Contact:

Re: V10 & XFS - all there is to know (?)

Post by tsightler » 2 people like this post

I believe you might not be thinking of it correctly. When Veeam clones blocks, it is doing so post-compression. If you have 1000 unchanged blocks in the chain when a synthetic full is created, it doesn't matter if they are compressed or uncompressed, Veeam will clone the space used by those 1000 blocks. If the block was written uncompressed, it would clone the full 1MB of data, if the block was compressed, only the space used by the compressed size of the block would need to be cloned to the new block.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Ivan.G, mrmccoy007, psmith023 and 86 guests