Proxmox Backup Server 1.0 (stable)
- Thread starter martin
- Start date
Is file level backup and/or restoration still on the roadmap, and if so will it include Windows support?
File level backup is already avaible via the proxmox-backup-client and has been for a long time. Don’t know about windows though
I'm running my test system on an encrypted zfs dataset, no issues so far, the PBS system just sees it as a dedicated directory. Of course I need to manually unlock the dataset whenever the server is rebooted, but that's a feature, and how often should a backup server need to be rebooted, anyway?
Do you plan any integration with Synology or QNAP devices? That would be a bull's-eye and a big nail in your competitors' coffin.
I have 1 proxmox server running an old version (Virtual Environment 5.4-15), is it possible at all to have this working with PBS?
No, I'm afraid - Proxmox VE 5.4 is EOL sine July and it's software stack is too old to just add Proxmox Backup Server without major changes all over the place. At that point, we deemed that it's less risky and more efficient to upgrade to 6.x, which needs to be done anyway due to EOL of the 5.x release.
So, please upgrade to Proxmox VE 6.x first: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Upgrade_from_5.x_to_6.0
I was really excited, then I saw the community annual price .. ack.. 
Been a paid supporter/customer for a little while now. Just cannot justify paying for 5x licenses worth of Proxmox for 1 home lab. Community price seem skewed to anyone else? Especially for annual subscription.. if that was perpetual price.. ok, can see that.. $500+
Way to much for my home lab.
Been a paid supporter/customer for a little while now. Just cannot justify paying for 5x licenses worth of Proxmox for 1 home lab. Community price seem skewed to anyone else? Especially for annual subscription.. if that was perpetual price.. ok, can see that.. $500+Way to much for my home lab.
Last edited:
I read the docs and still am a bit confused of how deduplication works:
1. On the Summary page of my Datastore it says: "Deduplication Factor 5.54". What exactly does that mean?
2. Is deduplication done in the scope of machines (host,CT,VM) or in the scope of the datastore? I.E. if i have 3 almost identicial VMs, will the deduplication for the backup happen so that only the incremental backups of each VM is considered or will all 3 VMs be taken into account?
Thanks in advance!
1. On the Summary page of my Datastore it says: "Deduplication Factor 5.54". What exactly does that mean?
2. Is deduplication done in the scope of machines (host,CT,VM) or in the scope of the datastore? I.E. if i have 3 almost identicial VMs, will the deduplication for the backup happen so that only the incremental backups of each VM is considered or will all 3 VMs be taken into account?
Thanks in advance!
it means that on average, each chunk is used 5.54 times (total referenced chunks/actual chunk count)
deduplication is happening on datastore level (all backup snapshots in a datastore reference the same chunk store)
We're currently running a 8 node cluster - 3 nodes are dedicated to CEPH. All our QCOW2 files reside on the CEPH cluster and we do a vma.zst backup to an NFS share. Our network is all 10GBIT and we're seeing only 40MB/S backups which is becoming a big issue as our client base grows on this cluster. Interested in switching our NFS server to PBS but would only make sense for us if QEMU is no longer managed in 64k blocks (I believe this is our bottle neck right now). Can you advise?
Hello
To have a real "Veeam" killer ;-)
Will it be possible to restore only one file from a backup from GUI ?
Regards
Pierre-Yves
To have a real "Veeam" killer ;-)
Will it be possible to restore only one file from a backup from GUI ?
Regards
Pierre-Yves
Yes, that is on the roadmap and actively worked on (and works already for file-based backups, e.g., Container backups).
I'd not hold my breath for it.
We evaluated that one very closely and the diffs we get from ZFS do not work for the sliding window algorithm in use (which is only semi-correlated to files), it would effectively mean that combination of deduplication and full-backups would need to be abandoned, which we do not want - backups where one needs to apply multiple diffs and pray that that works out is something we want to avoid at all cost.
Ceph rbd would also only help for fixed size block based backups, as there's no function which can map block diffs to a dynamic block sized archives. There was lots of technical discussion, on lists and also internally - if there's a break through we will also certainly go for it; but it currently does not seem like that would be anytime soon.
Last edited: