-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 44
- Liked: 4 times
- Joined: Mar 19, 2010 12:36 pm
- Full Name: David Hirsman
- Contact:
Re: [upgrade issue] v6 initial incremental massive
I recieved a new Veeam.Backup.Core.dll from Veeam support with instruction to replace the one that is in Veeam folder. After that I launched 2 backup jobs and both worked fine. VIB files are now "normal" size again and the backup speed is as expected. So it looks like R&D found a solution.
Thanks Veeam for addressing the issue and providing a solution that quickly
Thanks Veeam for addressing the issue and providing a solution that quickly
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31806
- Liked: 7300 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: [upgrade issue] v6 initial incremental massive
David - I thought our support asked you not to post about this on the forum just yet and there was a good reason for that - the current DLL was not built with the "release" configuration, so we would still need to go through the normal build process and test the final DLL before we can start distributing it to everyone who has the support cases open.
Good to hear that it helps though!
Good to hear that it helps though!
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 44
- Liked: 4 times
- Joined: Mar 19, 2010 12:36 pm
- Full Name: David Hirsman
- Contact:
Re: [upgrade issue] v6 initial incremental massive
sorry...my misstake. I totally missed that part in the email...
I was so focused on the solution part of the email that I didn notice just that
I was so focused on the solution part of the email that I didn notice just that
-
- Novice
- Posts: 4
- Liked: never
- Joined: Nov 30, 2011 10:21 pm
- Full Name: aaron norris
- Contact:
Re: [upgrade issue] v6 initial incremental massive
At least it's a known problem and people don't think it's just them now
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31806
- Liked: 7300 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: [upgrade issue] v6 initial incremental massive
There is sticky topic posted on this forum that I posted earlier today, it lists all known v6 issues including this one... people just need to read stickies
-
- Novice
- Posts: 4
- Liked: never
- Joined: Nov 30, 2011 10:21 pm
- Full Name: aaron norris
- Contact:
Re: [upgrade issue] v6 initial incremental massive
Oops, I guess i'm kinda just trained to skip past those from other forums.Gostev wrote:There is sticky topic posted on this forum that I posted earlier today, it lists all known v6 issues including this one... people just need to read stickies
Do you guys need more technical cases/logs of the SAN fail over to NDB thing? I'm having it as well, but if it's already known I'm not sure if I should bother?
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31806
- Liked: 7300 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: [upgrade issue] v6 initial incremental massive
Aaron, logs definitely would not hurt - last time I checked with R&D few hours ago, the research was still "in process". We would also love to have a list of customers available in support who are ready to validate the fix (we could not reproduce this issue on our own SAN storage devices), so if you open the support case, our support will track you for that purpose as well. Thanks for your willingness to help!
-
- Influencer
- Posts: 13
- Liked: never
- Joined: Mar 02, 2010 7:30 pm
- Full Name: jerome Beunel
- Contact:
problem of speed with V6
[merged]
Hello
I just upgrade my veeam V5 to veeam backup V6 and i have a problem.
My job run using network mode , i use the last build of vmware ESXi 4.1, my network speed is 1Gb/s.
With version V5 i was able to run my jobs at 700MB 800MB/s and most of my backup finish in 2 or 3 minutes.
With version V6 i run only one job on my veeam backup server and the speed is 30MB - 50MB max and it take 1hour.
I don't understand what's happend.The cpu is use at 20% , the ram is ok and i notice that the network is now use at the maximum(looks better than V5), the current speed of used bandwidth 850Mb/s for a 1Gb/s network.(With V5 it use only 300Ms/s but it's was 20X faster than V6)
Architecture:
SITE A-------1Gb/s----------------SITE B
VM1 Veem backup backuping VM1
Is there new setings to do with V6 or new architecture?
Can you help please?
With this speed all my backup will crash tonight.
Regards
Hello
I just upgrade my veeam V5 to veeam backup V6 and i have a problem.
My job run using network mode , i use the last build of vmware ESXi 4.1, my network speed is 1Gb/s.
With version V5 i was able to run my jobs at 700MB 800MB/s and most of my backup finish in 2 or 3 minutes.
With version V6 i run only one job on my veeam backup server and the speed is 30MB - 50MB max and it take 1hour.
I don't understand what's happend.The cpu is use at 20% , the ram is ok and i notice that the network is now use at the maximum(looks better than V5), the current speed of used bandwidth 850Mb/s for a 1Gb/s network.(With V5 it use only 300Ms/s but it's was 20X faster than V6)
Architecture:
SITE A-------1Gb/s----------------SITE B
VM1 Veem backup backuping VM1
Is there new setings to do with V6 or new architecture?
Can you help please?
With this speed all my backup will crash tonight.
Regards
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31806
- Liked: 7300 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: [upgrade issue] v6 initial incremental massive
Jerome, you are seeing full backup here. Your next incremental run should be "normal", and much faster than in v5. See above for more details. Thanks.
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 264
- Liked: 30 times
- Joined: Mar 22, 2011 7:43 pm
- Full Name: Ted
- Contact:
Re: [upgrade issue] v6 initial incremental massive
It does seem like a synthetic roll-up gets it back to a single large .vbk with normal sized .vrb files.
Unfortunately, I messed up one of my entire backup chains trying to work on it myself while waiting for tech support to call back.
Dunno what to do with "12/2/2011 4:27:20 PM :: TextFromTar failed
Client error: There is no FIB [summary.xml] in the specified restore point.
Failed to restore file from local backup. VFS link: [summary.xml]. Target file: [MemFs://Tar2Text]. CHMOD mask: [32176204]."
Unfortunately, I messed up one of my entire backup chains trying to work on it myself while waiting for tech support to call back.
Dunno what to do with "12/2/2011 4:27:20 PM :: TextFromTar failed
Client error: There is no FIB [summary.xml] in the specified restore point.
Failed to restore file from local backup. VFS link: [summary.xml]. Target file: [MemFs://Tar2Text]. CHMOD mask: [32176204]."
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 34
- Liked: 3 times
- Joined: Apr 05, 2011 1:37 pm
- Full Name: vmware
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Hi, as I could read from the post "[BEFORE YOU UPGRADE] Summary of known v6 issues " the patch to fix my problem is ready. I've asked the support for it (case 5158319) but they say it isn't ready yet. So where's the truth? Without it I cannot upgrade and I need v. 6 to start the Disaster Recovery project using the enhanced replication features that I'm waiting since v5 release.
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31806
- Liked: 7300 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Patch was ready, but I am guessing coffee for our support was not
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 34
- Liked: 3 times
- Joined: Apr 05, 2011 1:37 pm
- Full Name: vmware
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Hi Gostev,
the support just send me the FTP for the patch. This afternoon will be dedicated to install and test the new release. As soon I'll get news results, I will share them with the community.
the support just send me the FTP for the patch. This afternoon will be dedicated to install and test the new release. As soon I'll get news results, I will share them with the community.
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 34
- Liked: 3 times
- Joined: Apr 05, 2011 1:37 pm
- Full Name: vmware
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
After the upgrade, it works like a charm!
Thank you for the support!
Thank you for the support!
-
- Lurker
- Posts: 2
- Liked: never
- Joined: May 11, 2011 4:40 pm
- Full Name: Michael Musil
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Do these massive incremental backup issues apply for reverse-incremental backups as well? (Issue #3 on the BEFORE-YOU-UPGRADE Summary) I asked support about this today, and they seemed to think that reverse incremental backups would not be affected after the upgrade to 6 from 5.02.
-
- VP, Product Management
- Posts: 27377
- Liked: 2800 times
- Joined: Mar 30, 2009 9:13 am
- Full Name: Vitaliy Safarov
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Hi Michael, jobs with reversed incremental backup mode are not affected by this. This issue specifically talks about VIB files which are only created while using forward incremental backup mode. Thanks!
-
- Lurker
- Posts: 2
- Liked: never
- Joined: May 11, 2011 4:40 pm
- Full Name: Michael Musil
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Thank you for the clarification.
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 264
- Liked: 30 times
- Joined: Mar 22, 2011 7:43 pm
- Full Name: Ted
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
I didn't apply this patch because I couldn't wait for the patch and just started completely over.
However -- today it's doing it again, on 2 different jobs. 1 job is a brand new job created in v6. The other job is one that I was able to continue from v5.
I'll apply the patch today and see what happens.
However -- today it's doing it again, on 2 different jobs. 1 job is a brand new job created in v6. The other job is one that I was able to continue from v5.
I'll apply the patch today and see what happens.
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 264
- Liked: 30 times
- Joined: Mar 22, 2011 7:43 pm
- Full Name: Ted
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
If a virtual disk is moved to a different datastore, will it have to do a full backup on that disk?
After the patch, one of the drives (that was moved to a different datastore) STILL did a full backup, but the other drives did incremental (and they were doing full earlier). I haven't tested the other job yet.
After the patch, one of the drives (that was moved to a different datastore) STILL did a full backup, but the other drives did incremental (and they were doing full earlier). I haven't tested the other job yet.
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31806
- Liked: 7300 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Out of common sense, there is no way for us to match "new" disk to the "old" disk in backup (same name and size is not enough to make that conclusion) - which is why full backup is required. I will confirm my response with the devs tomorrow.
Also, make sure you are not mapping backup file created by one Veeam deployment into another one, as this would cause full backup as well instead of incremental. Backup file mapping is only supported within the same deployment.
Also, make sure you are not mapping backup file created by one Veeam deployment into another one, as this would cause full backup as well instead of incremental. Backup file mapping is only supported within the same deployment.
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 264
- Liked: 30 times
- Joined: Mar 22, 2011 7:43 pm
- Full Name: Ted
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Well -- I used VMware migration to move a virtual disk from one datastore to another. (Not the entire VM, and I don't have storage vMotion.) I guess I would understand if CBT wasn't maintained -- but I certainly don't think for a moment that CBT couldn't be maintained -- but that would be for VMware, not Veeam, to maintain. No backup file mapping or anything like that happening here.
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31806
- Liked: 7300 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Well, it's completely NOT about CBT - there is just no way for the job to understand that this is the same virtual disk. Only you know that it was migrated, but the job sees that as plugging in some new virtual disk from another datastore to the VM - with certain size and certain name. To make it even more complicated, VMware even supports VM having different virtual disks with the same name - as long as they are on different datastores. So you can have 2 virtual disks with absolutely different content, but the same name and the same size (just on different datastores).
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 264
- Liked: 30 times
- Joined: Mar 22, 2011 7:43 pm
- Full Name: Ted
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
That seems counter-intuitive. I didn't edit the VM configuration to remove the disk, then manually move the .vmdk files, and edit the VM configuration to add it back in. So VMware clearly knows that it's the "same" virtual disk.
So what happens when someone uses storage vMotion to move a disk to another datastore? Does Veeam always start over with a full backup?
So what happens when someone uses storage vMotion to move a disk to another datastore? Does Veeam always start over with a full backup?
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31806
- Liked: 7300 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Well, Storage VMotion does not touch virtual disk configuration the way you did, so that's different story. You said you added the disk back as a new disk. How can the job know if you attached the same disk, or some other disk with the same name and size from a different datastore? I am going to need to ask QC to repeat your process though, to make sure I am right with my thinking.
By the way, when moving the virtual disk to another datastore, did you also move the corresponding CTK file along? As this may also explain why full scan is performed.
By the way, when moving the virtual disk to another datastore, did you also move the corresponding CTK file along? As this may also explain why full scan is performed.
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 264
- Liked: 30 times
- Joined: Mar 22, 2011 7:43 pm
- Full Name: Ted
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Sorry -- I didn't say I manually moved it (I said "didn't"). I wasn't clear at first, but I used VMware migration. You know -- you shut down the virtual machine, right click on it and select "Migrate". Then you do an advanced migration where you only migrate certain disks to different datastores. I supposed I'd call it the equivalent of "cold storage vMotion". I have VMware Essentials Plus which means no "hot" storage vMotion. So VMware (vCenter) did it -- not through datastore browser or Veeam copy or scopy or anything else.
-
- Influencer
- Posts: 22
- Liked: never
- Joined: Oct 16, 2012 5:47 pm
- Full Name: John White
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Is this replacement DLL still being distributed only as needed or is there an update I can apply for this issue?
I've got a forever-incremental w/ synthetic fulls and rollbacks that runs fine except on synthetic day, where it completes the backup fine then fails with this error.
I've got a forever-incremental w/ synthetic fulls and rollbacks that runs fine except on synthetic day, where it completes the backup fine then fails with this error.
Code: Select all
12/15/2012 8:19:11 PM :: TextFromTar failed
Client error: There is no FIB [summary.xml] in the specified restore point.
Failed to restore file from local backup. VFS link: [summary.xml]. Target file: [MemFs://Tar2Text]. CHMOD mask: [0].
-
- VP, Product Management
- Posts: 27377
- Liked: 2800 times
- Joined: Mar 30, 2009 9:13 am
- Full Name: Vitaliy Safarov
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Hi John,
Thanks for using search! But this is a one year old thread, so I believe this issue should have already been resolved by the newer versions of Veeam B&R. Can you please tell me what version are you at? What is your support case number?
Thanks!
Thanks for using search! But this is a one year old thread, so I believe this issue should have already been resolved by the newer versions of Veeam B&R. Can you please tell me what version are you at? What is your support case number?
Thanks!
-
- Influencer
- Posts: 22
- Liked: never
- Joined: Oct 16, 2012 5:47 pm
- Full Name: John White
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Hi Vitaliy, sorry to necro this old thread, I neglected to read the year in the date stamp.Vitaliy S. wrote:Hi John,
Thanks for using search! But this is a one year old thread, so I believe this issue should have already been resolved by the newer versions of Veeam B&R. Can you please tell me what version are you at? What is your support case number?
Thanks!
I haven't opened a support case yet as I just encountered this issue. The Veeam version is 6.1.0.181 64-bit.
-
- VP, Product Management
- Posts: 27377
- Liked: 2800 times
- Joined: Mar 30, 2009 9:13 am
- Full Name: Vitaliy Safarov
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Could you please try to apply this patch that should resolve your issue? See this KB article for the download link: http://www.veeam.com/KB1671
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31806
- Liked: 7300 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: v6 initial incremental massive
Or better yet, upgrade to the latest product version
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: apolloxm, Bing [Bot], Semrush [Bot] and 257 guests