Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] More than one job per Windows client

2012-09-21 04:27:47
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] More than one job per Windows client
From: lst_hoe02 AT kwsoft DOT de
To: bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 10:25:07 +0200
Zitat von Geert Stappers <Geert.Stappers AT vanadgroup DOT com>:

> Op 20120920 om 23:18 schreef Radosław Korzeniewski:
>> 2012/9/20 <lst_hoe02 AT kwsoft DOT de>
>> > Zitat von lst_hoe02 AT kwsoft DOT de:
>> >
>> > > Hello
>> > >
>> > > we try to do backups with two jobs in parallel for our Windows
>> > > fileserver to get better throughput. Unfortunately both jobs start as
>> > > expected, but only one proceed with VSS and saving the other simply
>> > > waits for the first to complete. We have set the "max concurrent jobs"
>> > > in the storage the director and the client config, so this should not
>> > > be a problem. Is this even possible on Windows or are we limited to
>> > > one save job?
>> > >
>> >
>> > Not possible at all?
>> > No one tested?
>> > Or no one cares?
>
> Another option:
>
> The original poster's "unacceptable limit" is not a limit to others
> or it is a acceptable one.

Sorry if someone feel offended by my post, i'm no native english  
speaker so it may have sound more unfriendly then intended.
Because i found no hint in the documentation that it should not work,  
i decided to ask if it should work before trying to find a error in  
the config for what is simply a missing feature. I only started  
recently with Bacula and what might be obvious for long time  
users/developers is not that obvious for me.


>> >
>> > Would be really nice to know if it should be possible to run more than
>> > one backup job per machine.
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> You have to ask developers. There are a mutex in the VSS code which limits a
>> number of concurrent VSS jobs. I'm not sure why it is there. Is it  
>> a limitation
>> of VSS or Bacula?
>>
>
> FWIW: I would ask it more open, like:
>
>  Hello,
>
>  With the backup of Microsoft Windows servers I have (the feeling) to go
>  through a bottle neck.
>  So now I'm trying to create a parallel lane to get more throughput.
>
> and elaborate it with:
>> > > we try to do backups with two jobs in parallel for our Windows
>> > > fileserver to get better throughput. ------------- Both jobs start as
>> > > expected, but only one proceed with VSS and saving the other simply
>> > > waits for the first to complete. We have set the "max concurrent jobs"
>> > > in the storage the director and the client config, so this should not
>> > > be a problem.
>
> Then come with smart questions like
>
>   How is "max concurrent jobs" on a winbacula file deamon propagated  
> into VSS?


That would have been the next step, i first want to check if it should  
work that way at all or if parallel backups of one machine is not  
possible anyway.


>   Whatelse beside "max concurrent jobs" is needed for doing parallel backup?
>
>
> My next step would be doing more research on _my_ problem. Even it fails,
> it gives other people more time to respond om my message. The good thing
> about it, is that it avoids a rude _same day_ "I DEMAND A REPLY!".

Strictly speaking it wasn't the same day and as said the core question  
was "is it supposed to work so i have to dig deeper in or is it known  
not to work that way". I was under the impression that someone must  
have been on that road before so a simply "no" as answer would be  
sufficient.

> In the occasion of no reply from the mailing list,
> I would come back with the results of my research.
> Depending of the outcome I would post either
>
>    I have the feeling that I'm building a second neck on the bottle.
>
> or
>
>    If I'm asking for a second neck on the bottle, please say so.
>
> Cheers
> Geert Stappers

The problem arises from slow backup rates (3 .. 30 MBytes/sec) with  
using encryption. This especially hurts on the Windows fileserver  
which has more than one I/O channel and also more than one core. With  
one FD working, one core is saturated and in case of small files the  
transfer speed go below 10MBytes/sec. The idea was to start a second  
FD (thread) using one of the idle cores and working on another  
filesystem (other I/O channel) on the same machine to get more speed.

So if i got it right until here it is not (yet) possible and might  
have to do with VSS (Windows)?

Many Thanks

Andreas



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Got visibility?
Most devs has no idea what their production app looks like.
Find out how fast your code is with AppDynamics Lite.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;262219671;13503038;y?
http://info.appdynamics.com/FreeJavaPerformanceDownload.html
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users