Salta al contenuto principale

12.5 TIBX is 3-10 times slower than TIB for high compression

Thread needs solution

Hi,

as already written in another thread, I started from scratch and set-up everything again. Now I noticed that my backups are damned slow. After some investigation and testing I found that my new backup plans use tibx instead of tib. 

So I did a test.

Backup source is a shut down server 2008 vm with a 60GB disk. Backup target is a Synology DS216+II. Backup compression is high, backup format is either 11 or auto (12). Full backup.

  TIB TIBX
Backup duration 6 min 32 min
Backup size 9519MB 8181MB
CPU load in agent 65% 100%
Disk read in host 170K/s 25K/s
Network write  300MBits/s 50MBit/s

CPU Load

2017-06-06_17h08_45.png

Network

2017-06-06_17h09_16.png

 

Now  I changed all backup plans back to TIB. And because that's not possible without creating a new plan, you have to export the plan and edit the json file and then import the file again. 12.5 is such a waste of time...

Regards
Martin

0 Users found this helpful

Hello Martin,

Our own tests show that the new TibX is typically 40% faster on average than the legacy format in backup scenarios. Looking at the very significant difference in backup size, and the fact that your CPU is being heavily bottlenecked, I have a feeling that there is something going on with the compression settings. This is the type of thing you would normally see between the "none" compression setting and the maximum compression setting.

Can you double-check the compression settings? Also, what are your results if you set them to normal?

Hi Igor, the size difference between TIB and TIBX is around 10%, not very significant. I will repeat the test with normal compress. Stay tuned.

Test results for normal compression (Note: a second backup from my other host was running to the same target at the same time, so it is a little bit slower than before).

  TIB TIBX
Backup duration 7 min 5 min
Backup size 10.491MB 8973MB
CPU load in agent 25% 40%
Disk read in host 125K/s 150K/s
Network write  300MBits/s 350MBit/s

I was previously using high compression because it offered the best overall performance. Seems this is no longer true for TIBX. So it looks like high compression with TIBX is counterproductive.

Note: Processor used in the test is a Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1230 V2 @ 3.30GHz

 

Regards
Martin

P.S. I've changed the topic title to better reflect the test results.

Thank you Martin,

TibX uses a new compression library ( Zstd ). This usually gives us better performance both in terms of compression and in terms of speed -- you can see that the new compression on "normal" setting results in a smaller file than the previous format on "high". The trade-off is that you can't really compare the levels 1:1 between new and legacy formats.