Performance Improvement backup

[axelklos]

hi,

with veeam we are very happy at the moment (ok last 2 days we had some trouble upgrading to 6.1 .. but it's done now).

backups seems to be working again.

I'm looking to improve backup speed and saw in our jobs that our target seems to be bootleneck.

our configuration :

Raid 1 2disks: : c: ==> windows + sqlserver database
d: ==> data + veeam software

Raid 5 11 disks: e: ==> veeam backups


I checked i/o during backup and saw that a lot of i/o (espacially writes) was on sqlserver database file tempdb.mdf.
==> I assume that also have an impact on backup speed.

my idea would be now move sqlserver database to ssd (2x 50gb- raid 1 .. probally 2x50gb raid0 .. but I have
to secure/backup careful sqlserver database ).

what do you think?

regards

axel

[dellock6]

The two raid groups are managed by the same raid controller? This could be a possible problem.
Also, SSD are fast enough to use raid1 and have great performances, do not mess up with raid0 on a database storage...
Best choice would be obviously to have separated SQL server (is this a production sql or the veeam backend database?) and Veeam repository, but I suspect you did this because of budget constraints.

Luca.

[axelklos]

hi,

ups sorry forgot.. we have 2 controllers:

smart array p410 ==> raid 1 (c+d)

smart array p812 ==> raid 5 (e) where the backup files are located.

I think location of sqlserver files seems to be important. I also can try
move sql server files to e:\.. then it would be on same disk where backup
vbk are .. but performance should be better than on raid 1.

seperated sql server is an idea, but we only have 1gbit network and then we need a
fast storage / or ssd where the files are located ==> sqlserver on other host via
1gbit could be a bootleneck too.

I think best choice in that case is 2xssd (smallest size 30gb / 60gb should enough).

regards

axel

[Vitaliy S.]

I'm looking to improve backup speed and saw in our jobs that our target seems to be bootleneck.

If target is the bottleneck then switching to forward incremental backup job mode will help in reducing the I/O load on target repository. my 2cents.

[axelklos]

hi,

thank you for your fb .. but for some reason we really urgent need reverse incremental (and are happy with stability).
will do a test with ssd and move sql database.

but it's correct what I'm recognized .. heavy write on temp file of sqldatabase right? is there an dependency between
write to disk (backup file) and speed of sql server database?

[Gostev]

Hi Axel, just wanted to note that the next patch will bring enhancement to VBK transform performance, in case you can wait (probably about 1 month, until we get enough common support issues to justify the patch release). Thanks!

[habibalby]

Hello Axel,

You haven't mention what is the Backup Mode you are using!! That could be a bottleneck too if it's not configured properly and I have personally I've seen that even if the backup modes are configured properly, the performance speed is vary between mode and another.

I was in SAN Mode and still some of my backup jobs "Critical One's" are on SAN Mode proxy, but I have introduce a new proxy to backup only via HotAdd Mode "aka, Virtual Appliance Mode" and the backup performace boom almost 50 to 60 % of the SAN Mode Backup, provided the Virtual Appliace Mode requires the Proxy to be added on an interface beside the Hyper-visor of the Management Console which the vCenter added to the Veeam Console via that interface.

Planning to move other job from SAN Mode to HotAdd Mode.

Thanks,
Hussain