Very slow backups to Data Domain 640

We're getting very slow backups to our Data Domain 640. We're getting an average transfer rate of 2-3MB/s. We're using Veeam7 to backup, here are some of the bottleneck reports:

Load: Source 10% > Proxy 9% > Network 0% > Target 88%

Load: Source 20% > Proxy 14% > Network 2% > Target 98%

Load: Source 63% > Proxy 23% > Network 31% > Target 68%

Load: Source 8% > Proxy 20% > Network 0% > Target 99%

We're backing up from a Nutanix cluster to the Data Domain. We're using NFS and a Linux mount. We're only on 1GbE for the Data Domain and we don't have BOOST yet. I was reading online that people with a similar setup are getting a speed over 100MB/s.

Does anybody have any ideas?

Thanks!

Responses(3)

mkurowski

6 Posts

0

October 16th, 2014 13:00

Is nolock enabled? Receive/Window sizes @ 32768? Have attribute caching turned off or on?

Can you post your mount options and uname/release info? DDOS info?

-

Matthew Kurowski

Opinions/statements expressed herein are not necessarily those of my company.

45matai

6 Posts

0

October 16th, 2014 14:00

I'm not sure, I didn't set up the Linux machine. Are there instructions on how to set it up and configure it?

mkurowski

6 Posts

0

October 19th, 2014 12:00

(Sorry for the slow reply but I've been tied up with work. This is my personal account but I'm an EMC Partner and we had some pressing professional services engagements.)

I like having more information pulled and to establish a performance profile but in general you can use the following as a baseline configuration: This assumes much (compression, streams, schedules, software versions etc).

Settings:

rsize/wsize tuned: Make sure you are at least at a 32 KB read and right size (rsize and wsize) as that is supported broadly across Linux versions/kernels. If you are using NFS v4, that size should be the default; however, v3 defaults to 8K. Specifying the default size on a v4 system doesn't hurt and it's possible the default was changed.
Hard: If the system/application is best suited to wait for server response rather than report an error.
NFS v3: v3 has been more stable in my experience so is "safer" to set. Again, I don't know much of your environment.
Interrupts: Used with hard mounting if you want to have interruptible NFS requests

EMC Document 30124 in regards to stale handles troubleshooting provides an example: mount -F nfs -o hard,intr,vers=3,proto=tcp,rsize=1048600,wsize=1048600 rstr01:/ddvar /ddr/ddvar

Notice:

high read/write sizes
intr used with hard
forcing NFS v3

Even if the settings above improve performance to an acceptable level, you may want to do a deep dive analysis/tuning. You can also have an independent Health Check customized too.

Let me know how things go.

Cheers,

Matthew

-

Matthew Kurowski

//The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent my company's positions, strategies or opinions.

View All

No Events found!