Discussions specific to the VMware vSphere hypervisor
Post Reply
CaptainPistache
Enthusiast
Posts: 31
Liked: 2 times
Joined: Nov 30, 2017 9:42 am
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Veeam Deleted File Blocks (BitLooker) cons ?

Post by CaptainPistache » Oct 26, 2018 1:09 pm

Hello,

Simple question, is there any disadvantage or risk to use the "Exclude deleted file blocks" option in Veeam ?
And specifically when activating the option after the backup jobs have been used for a while ?

Thanks a lot.

Cheers,
Captain

foggy
Veeam Software
Posts: 18239
Liked: 1557 times
Joined: Jul 11, 2011 10:22 am
Full Name: Alexander Fogelson
Contact:

Re: Veeam Deleted File Blocks (BitLooker) cons ?

Post by foggy » Oct 26, 2018 3:12 pm 1 person likes this post

Hi Captain, actually this is a recommended setting, so no disadvantages. If you switch it in the middle of the backup chain, it will take effect starting from the next job session.

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 24785
Liked: 3513 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Veeam Deleted File Blocks (BitLooker) cons ?

Post by Gostev » Oct 26, 2018 3:56 pm 1 person likes this post

Additional data processing always means additional risk versus simply making a copy of an image, because more code means more places where data corruption bugs may be present. But for example, the market has eventually learnt to trust even deduplication, which has much more complex data processing algorithms behind it.

The checkbox is there because some people prefer to let any new functionality to stabilize for a few years before using it. BitLooker has been around for a while now, so it's quite mature and thus risks associated with using it are minimal... I mean, any tech that has been in use by hundreds of thousands of users for a few years is very unlikely to still contain unknown bugs ;)

CaptainPistache
Enthusiast
Posts: 31
Liked: 2 times
Joined: Nov 30, 2017 9:42 am
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Veeam Deleted File Blocks (BitLooker) cons ?

Post by CaptainPistache » Oct 29, 2018 5:17 pm

Thanks a lot to both of you for your answers !

Cheers,
Captain

masonit
Service Provider
Posts: 218
Liked: 15 times
Joined: Oct 09, 2012 2:30 pm
Full Name: Magnus
Contact:

Re: Veeam Deleted File Blocks (BitLooker) cons ?

Post by masonit » Jan 09, 2019 9:21 am

Hi

Yesterday we enabled "exclude deleted file blocks" on a bunch of older backup jobs were we still use reverse incremental. I thought this would only add benefits but today we see some jobs running really slow. Some repositories says they are overloaded. I have looked at thread below but still don't understand why there would be higher load with "exclude deleted file blocks". "Exclude swap file blocks" was enabled before we enabled "exclude deleted file blocks". We don't use file exclusions.

microsoft-hyper-v-f25/bitlooker-time-t3 ... ml#p183584

\Masonit

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 24785
Liked: 3513 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Veeam Deleted File Blocks (BitLooker) cons ?

Post by Gostev » Jan 10, 2019 2:25 am

Hi

With reversed incremental backup, you should have ran an active full after enabling "exclude deleted file blocks" for two reasons:

1. Without an active full, your VBK will not reduce in size anyway (it will just mark a bunch of blocks as unused).

2. First incremental run will produce a huge VRB due to all the deleted blocks "changing" from whatever content they had to zeroed, with their former content squeezed out of VBK into VRB. And because reversed incremental backup is very I/O intensive (3 IOs per each changed block) as well as the amount of changes in your scenario, this will cause high load on backup repositories for extended time.

Thanks!

masonit
Service Provider
Posts: 218
Liked: 15 times
Joined: Oct 09, 2012 2:30 pm
Full Name: Magnus
Contact:

Re: Veeam Deleted File Blocks (BitLooker) cons ?

Post by masonit » Jan 10, 2019 7:11 am

Thanks!

1. But all blocks marked as unused. Can't that space be used for new data without increasing the size of the VBK file?

2. Tonight backups ran fine. Maybe it was only the first run that was heavy? But what do you suggest. Should we use "exclude deleted file blocks" on jobs with reversed incremental? Right now it looks more like we use alot more repository space than we used before activating "exclude deleted file blocks". Not really what I was expecting.

*Update* Think I got it now. That extra spaced used for the first big VRB file will be freed up after that VRB file is removed from retention?

\Masonit

Gostev
SVP, Product Management
Posts: 24785
Liked: 3513 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Veeam Deleted File Blocks (BitLooker) cons ?

Post by Gostev » Jan 10, 2019 12:24 pm

1. Yes, it will be reused for new data as your VMs grow in size and need this extra space. But depending on how much disk space was released in VBK by enabling this option, they may never grow big enough to occupy all already preallocated VBK space, meaning that this repository space will be simply wasted. This is why active full is a good idea after enabling this option.

2. Correct. And this is also why it makes sense to do an active full instead (the only difference is that you will just have a huge VBK instead of a huge VRB, but either way they will go away based on retention).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: vmk0 and 35 guests