Search results

Ahh so that does not work with ZFS. Then only that works: You can't keep the snapshots: - Destroy all snapshots that come after the snapshot you wanna roll back to - Roll back to that snapshot

When you clone a VM, you can select what state or what snapshot you want to clone.

That is right. The probably nicer way would be to - Clone the VM and select the Snapshot you want to roll back to - Check your new VM - Delete the old VM if you are 100% sure you don't need any snapshots anymore.

Ahh, that makes sense. That probably also explains why the random metadata read speed on PBS is unimportant in my scenario and both disks offer similar results. I know this could come off as tedious, but I am interested in how the backup process works, otherwise, I can't really plan on what...

Sorry I wasn't precise in my words. Sure I can create a backup in snapshot mode, but at least for a NFS share as backup destination, it will create another full backup and not only send the changes. While in the ZFS world (zfs send), for a snapshot you only send a delta data.

That is very interesting. I somehow, without any knowledge to back it up, don't trust live backups. Yeah I know that QEMU should handle that, but to me it feels like added complexity to something where I wanna reduce the chances for errors as much as possible. Snapshot is probably also not...

Ahh that makes sense. So basically both disk were not the bottleneck and able to receive roughly 100mb/s, but the bottleneck was the PVE TLS speed of 117.54 MB/s?

That is not that important to me. As long as the verify job can finish within 6 days ;) No but seriously, I mostly do my backups irregularly. My VMs have their none OS and important data mostly on a NFS shares. So I don't regularly backup them, only during maintenance. Changes are small, I only...

I have two PBS systems. One uses a 2,5" HDD. The other a half decent NVME SSD. When I run the backup tasks twice (aka no new data, aka 100% data reused), why is there no performance difference?

Nobody able to answer me this? Why does a external 2,5" HDD perform as well as an NVME drive for reusing data? Otherwise I can't really plan for what would be my bottleneck for a real setup.

Ohh, and for what hardware and runs I am comparing, I am comparing: From PVE to PBS ext4 external USB 3.0 2,5“ HDD vs. From PVE to PBS ext4 INTEL SSDPEKKW128G7

Ok, I will try ;) Why does a external 2,5" HDD perform as well as an NVME drive for reusing data? Exceptions: Poor performance, because it has to read many small files/metadata/hashes to compare that to the backup task. I thought that is why Proxmox officially recommends special vdev...

Any idea what the bottleneck on the second run is? Is it the host that itself that is to slow and that is why the results for the HDD and SSD are almost the same?

I finally had the time to run some benchmarks :) On PVE SHA256 speed: 614.09 MB/s Compression speed: 592.06 MB/s Decompress speed: 846.54 MB/s AES256/GCM speed: 4700.58 MB/s Verify speed: 354.22 MB/s From PVE to PBS proxmox-backup-client benchmark --repository 10.0.51.50:test TLS...

Deine Antwort steht noch immer aus auf meine Controller Frage. Danke. Besser hätte ich es nicht erklären können! Doch, natürlich geht der Cache kaputt bei einem Stromausfall! Cache ist DRAM. DRAM ist volatiler Speicher. Ist der Strom weg, sind die Daten weg, futsch, kaputt, gegangen, für immer...

Gott, ich hätte das USV Beispiel nicht verwenden sollen :rolleyes: Wenn du aus einem Flugzeug springst, sorgt ein Fallschirm für die Unversehrtheit deiner Beine. Das heisst aber im Umkehrschluss nicht, dass du für den Gang zum Aldi einen Fallschirm mit dir mittragen musst um deine...

Die Fragen waren nicht an mich gerichtet, sondern an dich. Versuche sie mal zu beantworten. Ich versuche es mal zu vereinfachen, damit du nicht in irgendwelchen Nebelpetarden abtauchen kannst. Bieten nur RAID Controller mit Batterien Datenintegrität?

PLP ist für die Datenintegrität verantwortlich bei Cache, weil du durch den Cache einen volatilen Speicher hinzugefügt hast. Das ist ein bisschen wie deinem OS einen RAM cache hinzuzufügen und dann zu behaupten die USV sei für die Datenintegrität verantwortlich. Nicht wirklich, du hast mit dem...

Habe die Tabelle korrigiert für dich Gerät ohne PLP mit PLP Consumer SSD langsam mit Datenintegrität schnell mit Datenintegrität Enterprise SSD langsam mit Datenintegrität schnell mit Datenintegrität Nochmals: PLP hat absolut nichts mit Datenintegrität zu tun! Das ist auch völlig...

Mag mich auch noch an diesen Twitter Thread erinnern. Nicht mehr an ganz alle Resultate, aber etwa so: Die guten Hersteller waren aber alle ok, also WD, Samsung, Crucial. Schlecht waren Patriot und Adata SSD mit schlechter firmware Implementierung für den Phison E18 controller. Nee, da habt...