Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow
On 6/09/2012 12:02, Paul Van Wambeke wrote: On 5/09/2012 11:21, James Harper wrote: Using iperf I measured following performances : bacula-fd = the windows server 2008 R2 host, 1Gb/sec NIC bacula-dir = a linux ubuntu 10.04 PC, 1 100Mb/sec NIC bacula-sd = a linux ubuntu 10.04 server, 1 Gbite/sec NIC iperf serveriperf clientPerformance --- bacula-fdbacula-dir10 MBytes/sec bacula-fdbacula-sd111 MBytes/sec bacula-dirbacula-fd10 MBytes/sec bacula-sdbacula-fd 26 MBytes/sec So normally the bacula client should be able to write to the bacula storage at 26MBytes/sec ? Any suggestions ? Any crappy computer made in the last 5 years should be able to saturate a gigabit link using iperf. The fact that you are only getting 26Mbytes/second fd-sd is a bit worrying... it's well above the 1Mbit/second that bacula appears to be limited to but it's still an indication of a major problem. I haven't had that much experience with Hyper-V for performance testing but it should be able to approach Xen which easily gets gigabit speeds for Windows VMs. Is your switch up to the job? James - Aucun virus trouve dans ce message. Analyse effectuee par AVG - www.avg.fr Version: 2012.0.2197 / Base de donnees virale: 2437/5249 - Date: 04/09/2012 Probably we could fine tune the switches, but I still believe the main problem resided on the interaction between the bacula-fd and the host server's network config ... We have decided to re-install the windows server, this time without enabling the hyper-v role ... will try again and let you know if this changes something. Kind regards Paul Well, we re-installed the windows servers without hyper-V or any other role : no change in transfer rate. A Windows 7 laptop running bacula-fd 5.2.9 transfers at 35MBytes/sec ... So it seems to be linked to the fact that the server is a W 2008 R2 server ... Am I the only one having this problem, anybody succeeded in backup-up a W2008 R2 server with Bacula at correct transfer speeds ? Kind regards Paul -- Paul VAN WAMBEKE ICT OpenUp! and GPI Projects National Botanic Garden of Belgium Bouchout Domain, Nieuwelaan 38 1860 Meise Tel: ++32 2 260 09 66 Fax: ++32 2 260 09 45 -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Paul Van Wambeke [mailto:paul.vanwamb...@br.fgov.be] Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2012 13:38 An: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net; James Harper Betreff: Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow On 6/09/2012 12:02, Paul Van Wambeke wrote: On 5/09/2012 11:21, James Harper wrote: Using iperf I measured following performances : bacula-fd = the windows server 2008 R2 host, 1Gb/sec NIC bacula-dir = a linux ubuntu 10.04 PC, 1 100Mb/sec NIC bacula-sd = a linux ubuntu 10.04 server, 1 Gbite/sec NIC iperf serveriperf clientPerformance --- bacula-fdbacula-dir10 MBytes/sec bacula-fdbacula-sd111 MBytes/sec bacula-dirbacula-fd10 MBytes/sec bacula-sdbacula-fd 26 MBytes/sec So normally the bacula client should be able to write to the bacula storage at 26MBytes/sec ? Any suggestions ? Any crappy computer made in the last 5 years should be able to saturate a gigabit link using iperf. The fact that you are only getting 26Mbytes/second fd-sd is a bit worrying... it's well above the 1Mbit/second that bacula appears to be limited to but it's still an indication of a major problem. I haven't had that much experience with Hyper-V for performance testing but it should be able to approach Xen which easily gets gigabit speeds for Windows VMs. Is your switch up to the job? James - Aucun virus trouve dans ce message. Analyse effectuee par AVG - www.avg.fr Version: 2012.0.2197 / Base de donnees virale: 2437/5249 - Date: 04/09/2012 Probably we could fine tune the switches, but I still believe the main problem resided on the interaction between the bacula-fd and the host server's network config ... We have decided to re-install the windows server, this time without enabling the hyper-v role ... will try again and let you know if this changes something. Kind regards Paul Well, we re-installed the windows servers without hyper-V or any other role : no change in transfer rate. A Windows 7 laptop running bacula-fd 5.2.9 transfers at 35MBytes/sec ... So it seems to be linked to the fact that the server is a W 2008 R2 server ... Am I the only one having this problem, anybody succeeded in backup-up a W2008 R2 server with Bacula at correct transfer speeds ? Kind regards Paul Hi Paul, I'm backing up a lot of 2008 R2 Servers without speed issues. I've seen cases where a faulty nic driver caused such problems. Have you monitored the network interface and watched what happens (with wireshark for example)? I did not follow this thread - so this might have been suggested: Compression on the fileset may cause slow transfer rates Kind regards Julian -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow
Hi Julian I'm happy other user's succeeded in backup of W2008 R2 servers ... Could you give me the versions you are using on the Windows client and on the Linux director ? Thanks Kind regards Paul On 10/09/2012 13:45, Fahrer, Julian wrote: -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Paul Van Wambeke [mailto:paul.vanwamb...@br.fgov.be] Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2012 13:38 An: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net; James Harper Betreff: Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow On 6/09/2012 12:02, Paul Van Wambeke wrote: On 5/09/2012 11:21, James Harper wrote: Using iperf I measured following performances : bacula-fd = the windows server 2008 R2 host, 1Gb/sec NIC bacula-dir = a linux ubuntu 10.04 PC, 1 100Mb/sec NIC bacula-sd = a linux ubuntu 10.04 server, 1 Gbite/sec NIC iperf serveriperf clientPerformance --- bacula-fdbacula-dir10 MBytes/sec bacula-fdbacula-sd111 MBytes/sec bacula-dirbacula-fd10 MBytes/sec bacula-sdbacula-fd 26 MBytes/sec So normally the bacula client should be able to write to the bacula storage at 26MBytes/sec ? Any suggestions ? Any crappy computer made in the last 5 years should be able to saturate a gigabit link using iperf. The fact that you are only getting 26Mbytes/second fd-sd is a bit worrying... it's well above the 1Mbit/second that bacula appears to be limited to but it's still an indication of a major problem. I haven't had that much experience with Hyper-V for performance testing but it should be able to approach Xen which easily gets gigabit speeds for Windows VMs. Is your switch up to the job? James - Aucun virus trouve dans ce message. Analyse effectuee par AVG - www.avg.fr Version: 2012.0.2197 / Base de donnees virale: 2437/5249 - Date: 04/09/2012 Probably we could fine tune the switches, but I still believe the main problem resided on the interaction between the bacula-fd and the host server's network config ... We have decided to re-install the windows server, this time without enabling the hyper-v role ... will try again and let you know if this changes something. Kind regards Paul Well, we re-installed the windows servers without hyper-V or any other role : no change in transfer rate. A Windows 7 laptop running bacula-fd 5.2.9 transfers at 35MBytes/sec ... So it seems to be linked to the fact that the server is a W 2008 R2 server ... Am I the only one having this problem, anybody succeeded in backup-up a W2008 R2 server with Bacula at correct transfer speeds ? Kind regards Paul Hi Paul, I'm backing up a lot of 2008 R2 Servers without speed issues. I've seen cases where a faulty nic driver caused such problems. Have you monitored the network interface and watched what happens (with wireshark for example)? I did not follow this thread - so this might have been suggested: Compression on the fileset may cause slow transfer rates Kind regards Julian -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users - Aucun virus trouvé dans ce message. Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr Version: 2012.0.2197 / Base de données virale: 2437/5259 - Date: 09/09/2012 -- Paul VAN WAMBEKE ICT OpenUp! and GPI Projects National Botanic Garden of Belgium Bouchout Domain, Nieuwelaan 38 1860 Meise Tel: ++32 2 260 09 66 Fax: ++32 2 260 09 45 -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Paul Van Wambeke [mailto:paul.vanwamb...@br.fgov.be] Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2012 17:15 An: Fahrer, Julian Cc: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net Betreff: Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow Hi Julian I'm happy other user's succeeded in backup of W2008 R2 servers ... Could you give me the versions you are using on the Windows client and on the Linux director ? Thanks Kind regards Paul Hmm, I'm running various Version. I just checked two installations and I'm running 5.2.6 (client and director) and 5.2.10 (client and director) on there. I never had any performance issues like that - with no version I used so far. Kind regards Julian -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow
On 5/09/2012 11:21, James Harper wrote: Using iperf I measured following performances : bacula-fd = the windows server 2008 R2 host, 1Gb/sec NIC bacula-dir = a linux ubuntu 10.04 PC, 1 100Mb/sec NIC bacula-sd = a linux ubuntu 10.04 server, 1 Gbite/sec NIC iperf serveriperf clientPerformance --- bacula-fdbacula-dir10 MBytes/sec bacula-fdbacula-sd111 MBytes/sec bacula-dirbacula-fd10 MBytes/sec bacula-sdbacula-fd 26 MBytes/sec So normally the bacula client should be able to write to the bacula storage at 26MBytes/sec ? Any suggestions ? Any crappy computer made in the last 5 years should be able to saturate a gigabit link using iperf. The fact that you are only getting 26Mbytes/second fd-sd is a bit worrying... it's well above the 1Mbit/second that bacula appears to be limited to but it's still an indication of a major problem. I haven't had that much experience with Hyper-V for performance testing but it should be able to approach Xen which easily gets gigabit speeds for Windows VMs. Is your switch up to the job? James - Aucun virus trouve dans ce message. Analyse effectuee par AVG - www.avg.fr Version: 2012.0.2197 / Base de donnees virale: 2437/5249 - Date: 04/09/2012 Probably we could fine tune the switches, but I still believe the main problem resided on the interaction between the bacula-fd and the host server's network config ... We have decided to re-install the windows server, this time without enabling the hyper-v role ... will try again and let you know if this changes something. Kind regards Paul -- Paul VAN WAMBEKE ICT OpenUp! and GPI Projects National Botanic Garden of Belgium Bouchout Domain, Nieuwelaan 38 1860 Meise Tel: ++32 2 260 09 66 Fax: ++32 2 260 09 45 -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow
On 5/09/2012 02:52, James Harper wrote: Hi I have Bacula 5.01 Director installed on a Linux Ubuntu 10.04 server, and a Bacula 5.2.10 Client (Bacula-fd) running on a Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1 server, with Hyper-V role installed. Purpose is her to backup the host server, not the virtual machines. Initially the backup transfer rate was extremely slow (kbytes/sec). Changing the Network adapter (Broadcom NetXstreme 5714) settings to Large end Offload (LSO) = off as suggested in some posts increased the transfer rate to 1MB/sec, which is still 10 to 80 times slower than the transfer rates I have with other servers running Linux or Windows 7. Transferring a file 'by hand' over the net runs at 80 MB/sec ...So I suspect a problem with Bacula-fd. Any idea how to configure the server so that I can get decent backup transfer speeds ? I can't imagine these servers can't be managed by Bacula. First use something like iperf to make sure that the problem is not bacula. Test all possible combinations of send/receive for the following: . host server . bacula sd server . another pc/server that is separate (can be linux or windows) That should give you concrete evidence as to whether the problem is related to bacula. Hyper-V network can be terribly difficult in some cases. James - Aucun virus trouve dans ce message. Analyse effectuee par AVG - www.avg.fr Version: 2012.0.2197 / Base de donnees virale: 2437/5249 - Date: 04/09/2012 Thanks James for the suggestion. I have made the performance tests : copying a file from the host server to another Windows 7 PC was done at 80MBytes/sec. Using iperf I measured following performances : bacula-fd = the windows server 2008 R2 host, 1Gb/sec NIC bacula-dir = a linux ubuntu 10.04 PC, 1 100Mb/sec NIC bacula-sd = a linux ubuntu 10.04 server, 1 Gbite/sec NIC iperf serveriperf clientPerformance --- bacula-fdbacula-dir10 MBytes/sec bacula-fdbacula-sd111 MBytes/sec bacula-dirbacula-fd10 MBytes/sec bacula-sdbacula-fd 26 MBytes/sec So normally the bacula client should be able to write to the bacula storage at 26MBytes/sec ? Any suggestions ? Paul -- Paul VAN WAMBEKE ICT OpenUp! and GPI Projects National Botanic Garden of Belgium Bouchout Domain, Nieuwelaan 38 1860 Meise Tel: ++32 2 260 09 66 Fax: ++32 2 260 09 45 -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow
Using iperf I measured following performances : bacula-fd = the windows server 2008 R2 host, 1Gb/sec NIC bacula-dir = a linux ubuntu 10.04 PC, 1 100Mb/sec NIC bacula-sd = a linux ubuntu 10.04 server, 1 Gbite/sec NIC iperf serveriperf clientPerformance --- bacula-fdbacula-dir10 MBytes/sec bacula-fdbacula-sd111 MBytes/sec bacula-dirbacula-fd10 MBytes/sec bacula-sdbacula-fd 26 MBytes/sec So normally the bacula client should be able to write to the bacula storage at 26MBytes/sec ? Any suggestions ? Any crappy computer made in the last 5 years should be able to saturate a gigabit link using iperf. The fact that you are only getting 26Mbytes/second fd-sd is a bit worrying... it's well above the 1Mbit/second that bacula appears to be limited to but it's still an indication of a major problem. I haven't had that much experience with Hyper-V for performance testing but it should be able to approach Xen which easily gets gigabit speeds for Windows VMs. Is your switch up to the job? James -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow
Zitat von Paul Van Wambeke paul.vanwamb...@br.fgov.be: On 5/09/2012 02:52, James Harper wrote: Hi I have Bacula 5.01 Director installed on a Linux Ubuntu 10.04 server, and a Bacula 5.2.10 Client (Bacula-fd) running on a Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1 server, with Hyper-V role installed. Purpose is her to backup the host server, not the virtual machines. Initially the backup transfer rate was extremely slow (kbytes/sec). Changing the Network adapter (Broadcom NetXstreme 5714) settings to Large end Offload (LSO) = off as suggested in some posts increased the transfer rate to 1MB/sec, which is still 10 to 80 times slower than the transfer rates I have with other servers running Linux or Windows 7. Transferring a file 'by hand' over the net runs at 80 MB/sec ...So I suspect a problem with Bacula-fd. Any idea how to configure the server so that I can get decent backup transfer speeds ? I can't imagine these servers can't be managed by Bacula. First use something like iperf to make sure that the problem is not bacula. Test all possible combinations of send/receive for the following: . host server . bacula sd server . another pc/server that is separate (can be linux or windows) That should give you concrete evidence as to whether the problem is related to bacula. Hyper-V network can be terribly difficult in some cases. James - Aucun virus trouve dans ce message. Analyse effectuee par AVG - www.avg.fr Version: 2012.0.2197 / Base de donnees virale: 2437/5249 - Date: 04/09/2012 Thanks James for the suggestion. I have made the performance tests : copying a file from the host server to another Windows 7 PC was done at 80MBytes/sec. Using iperf I measured following performances : bacula-fd = the windows server 2008 R2 host, 1Gb/sec NIC bacula-dir = a linux ubuntu 10.04 PC, 1 100Mb/sec NIC bacula-sd = a linux ubuntu 10.04 server, 1 Gbite/sec NIC iperf serveriperf clientPerformance --- bacula-fdbacula-dir10 MBytes/sec bacula-fdbacula-sd111 MBytes/sec bacula-dirbacula-fd10 MBytes/sec bacula-sdbacula-fd 26 MBytes/sec So normally the bacula client should be able to write to the bacula storage at 26MBytes/sec ? That's a little bit asymetric, no? If you got 111MBytes/sec in one direction and 26MBytes/sec the other way around i would suspect something like duplex mismatch or the like. Have you check if your switch and the nic agree on speed and duplex settings to use? Regards Andreas -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
[Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow
Hi I have Bacula 5.01 Director installed on a Linux Ubuntu 10.04 server, and a Bacula 5.2.10 Client (Bacula-fd) running on a Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1 server, with Hyper-V role installed. Purpose is her to backup the host server, not the virtual machines. Initially the backup transfer rate was extremely slow (kbytes/sec). Changing the Network adapter (Broadcom NetXstreme 5714) settings to Large end Offload (LSO) = off as suggested in some posts increased the transfer rate to 1MB/sec, which is still 10 to 80 times slower than the transfer rates I have with other servers running Linux or Windows 7. Transferring a file 'by hand' over the net runs at 80 MB/sec ...So I suspect a problem with Bacula-fd. Any idea how to configure the server so that I can get decent backup transfer speeds ? I can't imagine these servers can't be managed by Bacula. Thanks in advance for your help, Kind regards Paul -- Paul VAN WAMBEKE ICT OpenUp! and GPI Projects National Botanic Garden of Belgium Bouchout Domain, Nieuwelaan 38 1860 Meise Tel: ++32 2 260 09 66 Fax: ++32 2 260 09 45 -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.2.10 on Windows 2008 R2 server : 1 MByte/sec transfer rate, very slow
Hi I have Bacula 5.01 Director installed on a Linux Ubuntu 10.04 server, and a Bacula 5.2.10 Client (Bacula-fd) running on a Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1 server, with Hyper-V role installed. Purpose is her to backup the host server, not the virtual machines. Initially the backup transfer rate was extremely slow (kbytes/sec). Changing the Network adapter (Broadcom NetXstreme 5714) settings to Large end Offload (LSO) = off as suggested in some posts increased the transfer rate to 1MB/sec, which is still 10 to 80 times slower than the transfer rates I have with other servers running Linux or Windows 7. Transferring a file 'by hand' over the net runs at 80 MB/sec ...So I suspect a problem with Bacula-fd. Any idea how to configure the server so that I can get decent backup transfer speeds ? I can't imagine these servers can't be managed by Bacula. First use something like iperf to make sure that the problem is not bacula. Test all possible combinations of send/receive for the following: . host server . bacula sd server . another pc/server that is separate (can be linux or windows) That should give you concrete evidence as to whether the problem is related to bacula. Hyper-V network can be terribly difficult in some cases. James -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
