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 B8930746F8 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 08:58:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A893B2F953 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 08:58:07 +0200 (CEST) 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 id AB63A2F93D for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 08:58:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 77B67466DE; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 08:58:06 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <676f24c5-1645-f14e-8650-8b5cf1715566@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 08:58:05 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:89.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/89.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion , aderumier@odiso.com, pve-devel References: <30b3e3feb72fa3c4c209d1ab64e07512676910a2.camel@odiso.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <30b3e3feb72fa3c4c209d1ab64e07512676910a2.camel@odiso.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.327 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.613 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [kernel.dk] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] qemu 6 : does proxmox backup handle parallel async chunck backup like the new backup code from qemu 6.0 ? X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2021 06:58:07 -0000 Hi, On 02.06.21 08:39, aderumier@odiso.com wrote: > I was looking for qemu 6.0 new features, > and it seem that they have implement parallel async chunks backup (and > I think for other block operations, through a new block-copy feature) > > https://github.com/qemu/qemu/commit/71eed4cebed487a4f3c9f97aba83c611bbe22f8d > > https://github.com/qemu/qemu/commit/de4641b46b020c5b332175f80e8bfe3d352888e8#diff-b33323044f2699244c126c6eae6c4083c3c99a16f4840030ac13238b1f569dc0 > > https://github.com/qemu/qemu/commit/26be9d62dd5f5268b814da24fd8e8b5c5b999ebe > > Is it alrealy implemented or on the roadmap for the proxmox backup code > ? > (To be honest, I didn't follow proxmox backup patches since a long > time, so I really don't known how much they are sharing with qemu > backup code) the parallel stuff works with our implementation, Stefan tried it and with their default the backup is much faster, so fast that the guest cannot do anything during that anymore :D So, IIRC, Stefan turned the default number of parallel operations down for a better balance of backup speed and guest impact. FYI, we have basic packages for bullseye as base ready here, and possible sync to pvetest in the next days/weeks - in those repos there's already QEMU 6.0. Something else we can use with Bullseye/PVE 7 is io_uring instead of AIO, looks like a much saner (and actually useful) design and there should be some, at least slight, improvements due to that too. https://kernel.dk/io_uring.pdf cheers, Thomas