Bandwidth issues with bareos

[Martin Pielke]

Good morning,

I have problems using the "bandwidth limitation" of bareos - I have installed bareos on my private Univention Corporate Server to backup quite a number of files from my network storage on a file storage on the internet. Bareos version is 13.2.2 (which is the latest available via UCS appstore).

Now whenever I run a full backup, my internet connection is blocked for several hours though I have set up the bandwidth limitation of bareos - maybe I made an error on this setup and I hope for someone here to help me solve this issue.

The repective Client entry in bareos-dir.conf is:

Client {
[...]
Maximum Bandwidth per Job = 1 k/s
}
I set a limit of 1 k/s to be very restrictive and to be way aways from the physical limit of my conncetion for testing.

The status command for the client then lists
[...] bwlimit=0kB/s
Now does this mean I mistyped the limit in the conf-file or is the limit that restrictive that it converts to 0 on the status?

Actually when I run a backup job, it comes up with
Rate: 44.5 KB/s
Which is fairly the maximum bandwidth of the connection at that time...

Is this a mistake in my conf or any bug in the system?

Thanks for any help on this issue.

Best regards

Martin Pielke

[Philipp Storz]

Hello Martin

Am 06.09.2014 10:00, schrieb Martin Pielke:
> Good morning,
>
> I have problems using the "bandwidth limitation" of bareos - I have installed bareos on my private Univention Corporate Server to backup quite a number of files from my network storage on a file storage on the internet. Bareos version is 13.2.2 (which is the latest available via UCS appstore).
>
> Now whenever I run a full backup, my internet connection is blocked for several hours though I have set up the bandwidth limitation of bareos - maybe I made an error on this setup and I hope for someone here to help me solve this issue.
>
> The repective Client entry in bareos-dir.conf is:
>
> Client {
> [...]
> Maximum Bandwidth per Job = 1 k/s
> }
> I set a limit of 1 k/s to be very restrictive and to be way aways from the physical limit of my conncetion for testing.
>
> The status command for the client then lists
> [...] bwlimit=0kB/s

I think this is the value of the parameter "maximumbandwidthperjob" that can be configured in
bareos-fd.conf.

> Now does this mean I mistyped the limit in the conf-file or is the limit that restrictive that it converts to 0 on the status?
>
> Actually when I run a backup job, it comes up with
> Rate: 44.5 KB/s
> Which is fairly the maximum bandwidth of the connection at that time...
>
> Is this a mistake in my conf or any bug in the system?

Interesting. Have you tried to set the value to something a bit bigger like 22 k/s?

Are director, storage and filedaemon all the same version and all on an UCS Server?



--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Philipp Storz philip...@bareos.com
Bareos GmbH & Co. KG Phone: Phone: +49221630693-92
http://www.bareos.com Fax: +49221630693-10

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Köln | Amtsgericht Köln: HRA 29646
Geschäftsführer: Stephan Dühr, M. Außendorf,
J. Steffens, P. Storz, M. v. Wieringen

[Martin Pielke]

Philipp,

thanks for the reply.

All components (dir, fd and sd) are running on the same machine, the UCS server, and bareos-fd -?, bareos-sd -? and bareos-dir -? all state the same version 13.2.2 (12 November 2013).

Now, I found that setting bandwidth limits is far more differentiated than I expected ... it seems there is a value for bandwidth limiting in every conf-file and bandwidth limits can be set on various levels... so I tried all of the options and it seems the system accepted the values but still is not limiting bandwidth.

I set up bareos-dir.conf to read

Job {

  [...]

  Maximum Bandwidth = 15 k/s

}

Client {

  [...]

  Maximum Bandwidth Per Job = 20 k/s

}

Furthermore I set bareos-sd.conf to read

Storage {

  [...]

  Maximum Bandwidth Per Job = 25 k/s

}

And finally I set bareos-fd.conf to read

FileDaemon {

  [...]

  Maximum Bandwidth Per Job = 30 k/b

}

After restarting all components, I got via bconsole:

status storage: [...] bwlimit=25kB/s

status client: [...] bwlimit=30kB/s

So it seems the system accepted the limits, but as soon as I run a job for tests (I created 4 x 1MB files and started a backup job) ... internet connection was blocked for a few minutes and the message generated once the job completed states:

Elapsed time: 1 min 31 secs

FD Bytes Written: 3,922,105 (3.922 MB)

SD Bytes Written: 3,922,747 (3.922 MB)

Rate: 43.1 KB/s

So the job exceeded any limit I set before.

Is there anything I forgot to activate bandwidth limitations? Or should setting the above values be enough?

Best regards

Martin Pielke

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "bareos-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bareos-users/SnAufguIvUA/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bareos-users...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bareos...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Philipp Storz]

Hello Martin,

indeed this seems to be a bug, I could verify that the bwlimit does not work correctly when using
very low values.

We test the bwlimit with a value of 1024k/s which seems to work.

Would you please file a bug in mantis on bugs.bareos.org?

Thank you very much.

Philipp

> 2014-09-08 11:31 GMT+02:00 Philipp Storz <philip...@bareos.com <mailto:philip...@bareos.com>>:

>
> Hello Martin
>
> Am 06.09.2014 10:00, schrieb Martin Pielke:
> > Good morning,
> >
> > I have problems using the "bandwidth limitation" of bareos - I have installed bareos on my private Univention Corporate Server to backup quite a number of files from my network storage on a file storage on the internet. Bareos version is 13.2.2 (which is the latest available via UCS appstore).
> >
> > Now whenever I run a full backup, my internet connection is blocked for several hours though I have set up the bandwidth limitation of bareos - maybe I made an error on this setup and I hope for someone here to help me solve this issue.
> >
> > The repective Client entry in bareos-dir.conf is:
> >
> > Client {
> > [...]
> > Maximum Bandwidth per Job = 1 k/s
> > }
> > I set a limit of 1 k/s to be very restrictive and to be way aways from the physical limit of my conncetion for testing.
> >
> > The status command for the client then lists
> > [...] bwlimit=0kB/s
>
> I think this is the value of the parameter "maximumbandwidthperjob" that can be configured in
> bareos-fd.conf.
>
>
> > Now does this mean I mistyped the limit in the conf-file or is the limit that restrictive that it converts to 0 on the status?
> >
> > Actually when I run a backup job, it comes up with
> > Rate: 44.5 KB/s
> > Which is fairly the maximum bandwidth of the connection at that time...
> >
> > Is this a mistake in my conf or any bug in the system?
>
> Interesting. Have you tried to set the value to something a bit bigger like 22 k/s?
>
> Are director, storage and filedaemon all the same version and all on an UCS Server?
>
>
>
> --
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen
>
> Philipp Storz philip...@bareos.com

> <mailto:philip...@bareos.com>
> Bareos GmbH & Co. KG Phone: Phone: +49221630693-92 <tel:%2B49221630693-92>
> http://www.bareos.com Fax: +49221630693-10 <tel:%2B49221630693-10>

>
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Köln | Amtsgericht Köln: HRA 29646
> Geschäftsführer: Stephan Dühr, M. Außendorf,
> J. Steffens, P. Storz, M. v. Wieringen
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups
> "bareos-users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bareos-users/SnAufguIvUA/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to

> bareos-users...@googlegroups.com <mailto:bareos-users%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>.

> To post to this group, send email to bareos...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:bareos...@googlegroups.com>.

> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>

[Martin Pielke]

Philipp,

sorry, completely forgot to say: thank you for the support.

I raised a bug as requested and wait for any update on this issue ... in the meantime I split my backup jobs onto different days to split the load in case of full backups.

Thanks

Martin

[Francesco Morosinotto]

Hello Martin,

can I ask you to link the bug you filled?
I'm too interested and affected by this problem; I would really like to know if there have been any updates and - if not - if you've found any workaround.

Thank you a lot

Francesco