From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C152C96947 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 17:08:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 762BC1A1A1 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 17:08:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 17:08:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C32BC460AE; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 17:08:44 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <11d3a67b-bc11-483f-c25b-2c6b634e4326@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 17:08:44 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:110.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/110.0 Content-Language: en-GB, de-AT To: Mark Schouten , Proxmox Backup Server development discussion References: From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.526 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -1.148 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to DNSWL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] Slow overview of existing backups X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 16:08:46 -0000 Hi, Am 25/01/2023 um 11:26 schrieb Mark Schouten: > Requesting the available backups from a PBS takes quite a long time.> A= re there any plans to start implementing caching or an overal index-file = for a datastore? There's already the host systems page cache that helps a lot, as long there's enough memory to avoid displacing its content frequently. > PBS knows when something changed in terms of backups, and thus when it=E2= =80=99s time to update that index. >=20 PBS is build such that the file system is the source of truth, one can, e.g., remove stuff there or use the manager CLI, multiple PBS instances can also run parallel, e.g., during upgrade. So having a guaranteed in-sync cache is not as trivial as it might sound.= > I have the feeling that when you request an overview now, all individua= l backups are checked, which seems suboptimal. We mostly walk the directory structure and read the (quite small) manifes= t files for some info like last verification, but we do not check the backu= p (data) itself. Note that using namespaces for separating many backups into multiple fold= er can help, as a listing then only needs to check the indices from the name= space. But, what data and backup amount count/sizes are we talking here? How many groups, how many snapshots (per group), many disks on backups? And what hardware is hosting that data (cpu, disk, memory). Hows PSI looking during listing? head /proc/pressure/*