Discussions specific to the VMware vSphere hypervisor
B.F.
Expert
Posts: 138
Liked: 7 times
Joined: Jan 28, 2014 5:41 pm
Contact:

Re: Bottleneck Confusion

Post by B.F. » Sep 28, 2017 3:48 pm

OK, not trying to beat the horse but just trying to fully understand all the behind the scenes things that are going on.

I did another test where I have a test VM at the DR site. I then created a VMDK that is on the same iSCSI storage where the replica is dumped. The VMDK is mounted in my test VM as E:\

I ran 11 LAN Speed Test runs to E:\ using 1gb of data. I ran the test from the same Veeam server at the main site that the replication job runs from. The average Read is 63 MB/s and 46 MB/s Write. That is way more than what I'm seeing on Veeam. As I type this, there is a replication job running 87% complete and only getting 5MB/s processing rate.

Why such a large discrepancy?

Thanks

foggy
Veeam Software
Posts: 16691
Liked: 1343 times
Joined: Jul 11, 2011 10:22 am
Full Name: Alexander Fogelson
Contact:

Re: Bottleneck Confusion

Post by foggy » Sep 29, 2017 3:21 pm

Veeam B&R not just sequentially reads data from the source repository (like the test does), but needs to copy only changed blocks, which makes it (slower) random reads.

B.F.
Expert
Posts: 138
Liked: 7 times
Joined: Jan 28, 2014 5:41 pm
Contact:

Re: Bottleneck Confusion

Post by B.F. » Sep 29, 2017 7:35 pm

Ah, that makes sense. So if only changed blocks are figured out and read from the source, the writing of the replica to the destination should only need to write what was pulled from the source correct? There really shouldn't be much of a writing overhead then. Wouldn't the replica then be written in sequence?

Thanks!

foggy
Veeam Software
Posts: 16691
Liked: 1343 times
Joined: Jul 11, 2011 10:22 am
Full Name: Alexander Fogelson
Contact:

Re: Bottleneck Confusion

Post by foggy » Oct 01, 2017 9:07 pm

That's correct, but you should pay attention at your source, since it is the bottleneck in this case.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests