From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dietmar@proxmox.com>
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) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 457C090F27
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:18:55 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2538A1DEAE
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:18:25 +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) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:18:24 +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 CBB2746547;
 Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:18:23 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 19:18:23 +0100 (CET)
From: Dietmar Maurer <dietmar@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 "DERUMIER, Alexandre" <alexandre.derumier@groupe-cyllene.com>,
 "f.ebner@proxmox.com" <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <143499946.1270.1706206703161@webmail.proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <d61185422c0949e17e6929592342c211fe856815.camel@groupe-cyllene.com>
References: <20240125144149.216064-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <20240125144149.216064-14-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <1540909020.1148.1706199226999@webmail.proxmox.com>
 <d61185422c0949e17e6929592342c211fe856815.camel@groupe-cyllene.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.6-Rev58
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.361 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC docs 13/13] vzdump: add section about backup
 fleecing
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 18:18:55 -0000

> >>Stupid question: Wouldn't It be much easier to add a simple IO-buffer
> >>with limited capacity, implemented inside the RUST backup code?
> 
> At work, we are running a backup cluster on remote location with hdd , 
> and a production cluster with super fast nvme,
> and sometimes I have really big write spikes (in GB/s), so it's
> impossible for the backup storage or network to handle it without
> increase latency or saturate link.
>  
> So with limited capacity (how much ? in memory ?), I don't think it
> solve the problem. If the buffer is full, the vm write will hang.

Ok, I can see the problem...