Search results

No, well said, I guess I missed it today. I was admittedly rushing among too many things and concluded too quickly that the behavior of the retention was not working as expected. In reality any comment about documenting it are non sensed since if it does its job as anyone would expect, there is...

Please forget it for now, switched 2 days ago while experimenting on a new DS, the history is still too short! Should have given a look to the logs before wasting your time, sorry!

Hi, I tried looking at both PVE and PBS docs after i came up with the following configuration but i am not getting what i would expect (i keep having just the last 24 backups, the 25th is always pruned, even if it was taken 2/3 days ago, 7 daily seems not respected)... can you please clarify to...

Initially it might... but over time the divergence is unavoidable and in the last years the increase in quick deep changes in the OS at all levels makes this explanation possibly "not so much true, anymore"... I see it as similar as the limitation posed by templates over "shared" updates, each...

Out of curiosity: * Isn't the garbage collector doing essentially a reference count for all chunks and deleting the orphans? And a consideration: why deduplicate data between different VM? Or more precisely, is it really doing something after complicating things? I was observing the behavior...

Good to know, I see you guys are taking seriously the job so a big thanks. I knew my comments were something intuitive, the telephone was invented more than twice in less than 10 years by people not even talking to each other (possibly because there was no telephone yet) :p I don't think so...

Well, I see the problem. By the way i would say that a general local disks graphs (ZFS, Ceph, LVM, not used, whatever) pane/tab would really be a good tool to have sometimes. For ceph there is the OSD page with the latencies, which is already something but with no RRD is hard to spot what's...

Yes, with Backup Server 2.1-6 now the graphs are showing some data. Anyway... the IO Delay is gone. I get that a multidevice single IO graph could be misleading (why not give the data for each involved disk then?) but when using ZFS in single disk configuration it would still be meaningful...

proxmox-backup 2.1-1 running kernel: 5.13.19-1-pve proxmox-backup-server 2.1.1-1 running version: 2.1.1 pve-kernel-5.13 7.1-4 pve-kernel-helper 7.1-4...

Hi, can you please expand on this point? Before proceeding on the wrong path i guess i need to understand why that would not be the case. I understand the garbage collector must probably run for the space to be "freed" but, afte that, shall we not reach the expected space occupation? I would...

That is the definition of an incremental backup in essence... I hope that this log line out of the backup JOB will make clear these are incremental backups... INFO: using fast incremental mode (dirty-bitmap), 420.0 MiB dirty of 120.0 GiB total Now i guess we must clarify what we mean by...

I don't want to talk about things I did not study fully yet but as far as i can see from the logs your statements are not correct for PBS but just for Proxmox VE. While VE has no command that i am aware of to perform non-full backups, PBS works with incremental backups (dirty maps) and transfers...

Hi, is there a way to know how much real space is a backup occupying on a datastore? Right now i can see only the full disk size of the VM for each backup which in contrast are incremental and, thanks to your nice job, not taking as much space as a full backup would... but without knowing how...

Hi, ZFS datastore performance stats are missing on a brand new perfectly working installation of Backup Server... is this not yet ready to deal with ZFS or is it a bug? Thanks!