On 19/04/2011 8:57 AM, comfi wrote:
> However, I'm having massive performance issues after switching to an NFS
> mount for my backup data.
>
> I'm using the following options:
>
> nfs.server.ourstuff.com:/backup/backuppc /var/lib/backuppc nfs
> nfsvers=3,tcp,hard,intr,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,bg
>
> These options were recommended to me by Data Domain, the manufacturer of the
> storage device containing my NFS mount. This device only supports CIFS and
> NFS, sadly. I have also tried with larger and smaller rsize/wsize, and
> noatime.
You almost definitely want to use noatime or equivalent, as this will
help performance... a lot... but I doubt that is your current issue...
> However, the performance is worse than atrocious and I can't believe
> everything is working correctly. For example, when I'm in the web GUI,
> clicking on Host Summary when on localdisk took less than 1 second. Now, on
> NFS, clicking on Host SUmmary takes 4 minutes and 31 seconds to come up, and
> that's with only three hosts and a grand total of about 400MB of backup data.
> That can't be right, even with NFS's slower performance. Everything on the
> server indicates that resources are fine. The CPUs are sleeping, RAM is way
> below half occupied, loads of free local disk...
>
> I tried making an NFS mont on a different storage device and got the same
> results. This other storage device, which I can't use for backups, is capable
> of doing iSCSI, so I tried mounting the backup volume that way and everything
> was fantastic. Performed like local disk (less than a second to pull up the
> host summary page). So basically, it's definitely the fact that I'm mounting
> via NFS. If I can't resolve this problem, we'll have to abandon BackupPC.
> That breaks my heart, because I really like what I see so far.
>
> Any suggestions? Thank in advance!
Yes, a few:
1) Don't blame backuppc when that isn't the culprit, the problem here is
NFS performance, or in other words, the fact your disk access speeds
(NFS) is too slow
2) Don't panic, most people are not terribly happy with their NFS
performance, but eventually, they either make it work, or move to a
better solution
3) Since NFS relies on network access speeds, check that you have
gigabit (at least) network all the way from your backup server to the
NFS server
4) Check you can support jumbo packets on your linux box, ethernet card,
switch, NFS box etc, all the way through
5) Check your switch for errors, dropped packets, etc
6) Check using other tools like dd or standard disk performance test
tools for your NFS performance before bothering with choosing a backup
solution, or any other software.
7) Use the appropriate mailing list to fix your NFS issues (perhaps a
forum for your NFS server hardware would be a better starting point).
8) Also, look at mounting with sync or async, udp instead of tcp, etc...
I hope all that helps, I've had my share of horrible NFS performance,
until I discovered it was the 100M ethernet port in the way, crap
switch, horrid network card, and eventually, RAID5 with slow HDD's
(RAID10 with fast HDD's works much better).
Good luck
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload
Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top
priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve
application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting
the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
|
