This note will discuss various "big" backup software, including commercial ones. List of candidates: Veeam Agent for Linux, Bacula.
Work with the file system will be checked, so that it is convenient to compare with previous candidates.
Expected results
Since both candidates are universal ready-made solutions, the most important result will be the predictability of work, namely, the same time of work when processing the same amount of data, as well as the same workload.
Overview of Veeam Agent for Linux
This backup program works with block devices, for which it has a module for the Linux kernel, which ensures the integrity of the backup by tracking changed data blocks. A more detailed description is .
The process of creating a file backup works on the basis of the same kernel module: a snapshot of a block device is created, which is mounted to a temporary directory, after which data is synchronized file by file from the snapshot to another local directory, or remote via the smb or nfs protocol, where several files are created in proprietary format.
The process of creating a file backup was never completed. At about 15-16% of the execution, the speed dropped to 600 kbsec and below, with 50% cpu usage, which potentially led to 6-7 hours of the backup process, so the process was stopped.
A case was created for Veeam technical support, whose employees suggested using block mode as a solution.
The results of working with the block-by-block mode of creating backups are as follows:
The running time of the program in this mode is 6 minutes for 20 GB of data.
In general, quite good impressions of the program, but in the general review, it will not be taken into account due to the very slow file mode of operation.
Review of Bacula
Bacula is a client-server backup software that logically consists of several parts, each of which performs its own part of the work. There is Director, which is used for management, FileDaemon is a service responsible for backup, StorageDaemon is a backup storage service, Console is an interface to Director (there are TUI, GUI, Web options). This complex is also included in the review because, despite the significantly high entry threshold, it is a fairly popular means of organizing backups.
In full backup mode
In this mode, Bacula proved to be quite predictable, performing an average backup in 10 minutes,
The load profile looks like this:
The size of the backups was approximately 30 GB, as expected when working in this mode of operation.
When creating incremental backups, the results did not differ much, except for the size of the repository, of course (about 14 GB).
In general, you can see a uniform load on one processor core, as well as the fact that the indicators are similar to a regular tar with compression activated. Due to the fact that the bacula settings for backup are very, very extensive, it was not possible to show a clear advantage.
The results
In general, the situation is unfavorable for both candidates, most likely due to the fact that the backup file mode is used. The next part will also consider the process of restoring from backups, general conclusions can be drawn from the total time.
Announcement
Backup Part 5: Testing Bacula and Veeam Backup for Linux
Backup Part 6: Comparing Backup Tools
Backup Part 7: Conclusions
Post Author: Pavel Demkovich
Source: habr.com