Recent content by IsThisThingOn

run it again but this time with a PBS destination so you get a TLS result on PVE. Then run the same benchmark again on PBS, where you don't get a TLS result.

What are your results from this: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/PBS_Client_CPU_Benchmark ?

That is why everybody will recommend you to use mirrors for blockstorage hypervisors and not RAIDZ. RAIDZ can be good for files, but is not good for block storage. Short overview on how this works: 4k secotor size is the default. So you will save 4k sectors onto your drives. Imagine a 2GB iso...

btw, we already have 2026 ;)

PBS is a rather poor technology for file backups. If you don't need blockstorage but files, something like robocopy, rsycn, zfs send or the likes will perform miles better, because it only has to read metadata (and for ZFS not even that). PBS on the other hand reas ALL the data, EVERY single...

Jesus, these prices are insane. Anyway, the PSU was used (Privatanbieter means private seller) and you don't need a CPU cooler (AMD has one included), nor a case fan.

I don't think is does 4k r/w and even on my consumer hardware I linked to you in another post I can easely reach 100MB/s. Anyway, in the real world, PBS will be way less relevant, since you only need to send changes. So in your case the local SHA256 we bill the biggest limitation. To go back...

ups, you are totally right, you can only run one backup at a time.

since I got asked about my PBS from @news, here are some more detailed informations:

AFIK you can easely test this. Just start two backups at the same time. Then run it again. Now it should be 100% dublicates and you are only benchmarking SHA256 That is exactly my guess. 3,6GBit/s is pretty far away from your goal of 10GBit/s. Alternatively, you could get a faster setup by...

Second test was on the PBS. Not sure if I can follow. I would even argue that the culprit is both CPUs. The first clear bottleneck seems to be TLS. I gave you 4 parts of TLS. We can rule out 1. According to you, we can also rule out 2. For 3, you get 203MB/s. That is IMHO a clear bottleneck...

What speeds do you expect? I think that 3GB/s per second is already pretty fast. What is your target speed you aim at? Is the current speed a problem? Or are you just surprised that you can't reach line speed and suspect an issue with your setup? Either way, here is my not so beefy setup. PVE...

Nur weil etwas möglich ist, ist es noch lange nicht sinvoll. Aber ja, Server2 könnte mit HDD passtrough als VM laufen, sowie auch PBS3 eine VM sein könnte und auch Server4. Nur warum? Und warum all die negativen Konsequenzen in Kauf nehmen? Und bist du dir der IMHO unnötig erhöhten Komplexität...

Server1: PVE für VMs. Server2: TrueNAS oder OMV ZFS für Daten Server3: PBS für Backups der PVE VMs Server4: ZFS destination für ZFS von Server2 Dann noch Server2 und Server3 mit S3 Backup ergänzen.

Ja, aber das ist noch immer Mist. Nehmen wir mal an, du hättest nur 100 Fotos à 10MB also 1GB an Daten. PBS, erste Sicherung: Liest die komplette 1GB. Macht ca. 4MB chucks, sichert die weg. PBS, zweite Sicherung: Liest nochmals die kompletten 1GB. Prüft das gegen eine checksum table, stellt...