On 10.07.20 16:06, Roland wrote: > i think there may be a misunderstanding here or i was not clear enough > to express what i meant. > > i guess in terms of backup storage, pbs is doing similar to what > borgbackup does - so indeed that IS i/o and storage effient , but that > refers to the backup target side. > > but what about the backup source? > > I was referring to VMware cbt as that is a means of avoiding I/O on the > VM storage, i.e. the backup source. > > afaik, proxmox/kvm does not (yet) have something like that !?
Proxmox Backup Server and Proxmox VE supports tracking what changed with dirty-bitmaps, this avoids reading anything from the storage and sending anything over the network that has not changed. > > I you have lot's of terabytes of VM disks, each incremental backup run > will hog the VMs storage (the same like full backup). > > In VMware, this is adressed with "changed block tracking", as a backup > agent can determine which blocks of a VMs disks have changed between > incremental backups, so it won't need to scan through the whole VMs > disks on each differential/incremental backup run. see above, we effectively support both - deduplication to reduce target storage impact and incremental backups to reduce source storage and network impact. https://pbs.proxmox.com/docs/introduction.html#main-features > > see: > https://kb.vmware.com/s/article/1020128 > https://helpcenter.veeam.com/docs/backup/vsphere/changed_block_tracking.html?ver=100 > > i don't want to criticize proxmox, i think proxmox is fantastic, i just > want to know what we get ( and what we don't get). > No worries, no offense taken ;) cheers, Thomas _______________________________________________ pve-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user
