Future ideas for ReaR, DRLM, and Bareos
D'haese, Gratien
Meixner, Johannes
Oliveira, Didac
Steffens, Jörg
Dühr, Stephan
An informal talk with ReaR, DRLM, and Bareos users about what they would liketo get implemented in future ReaR, DRLM, and Bareos versions. This talk happens at the end of the "Backup and Disaster Recovery" devroomtime schedule. This way also new ReaR, DRLM, and Bareos users could first getinformed about ReaR, DRLM, and Bareos so that afterwards they could bettertell about what enhancements or features they would like to have implementedin future versions.
 myself also from We are open for any questions concerns Whatever so if you have a question The person who is addressed the question to will repeat the question in the mic And then I'll sit on the question. Okay It's open any questions If you have no questions will be very short session Who of you actively uses one of the software pieces that are described today relax and recover whatever So and not you do not count your I Mean as an end user not as a developer It's an end user so and you do not have questions That's that's good news because it means it works Yes, what should I say If you're satisfied so far But he's not a user The user should we allow the question okay now Yeah, so the question has been the various team has several developers and one developer Marco van Veering has decided to not continue with the project and he has done a lot of contributions before and The question has been will it is slow down or development? Definitely because he has been a good developer But we continue we have our features the most features from barriers 16.2 have been implemented without Marco I would say So This had not dramatically impact. So yeah, it's it's not nice that these Didn't continue and I would prefer it another way but The barriers can project will of course continue and it is open source and we get also contribution from other sides Okay, that's the center The question has been about as we and rados Yes, the status about this Rados interface is available But as far as I know slow and as far as I know there We haven't received a lot of feedback from from this so it's not in the active focus currently We hope this will change and maybe some people will participate or add supported it But yeah, it's there it does work for others, but the performance should be improved and regarding as you mentioned And there there was some some Experimental work done already using lip droplet which is a library to access S3 amongst others but Yeah, that's the droplet is not not advancing very much and We also did not receive a lot of feedback regarding this So it may be continued in the future, but currently we don't know and maybe it's also I think Amazon has also Published some some library to access S3 for you for use with CEC plus plus Maybe that would be a better choice to use than droplet One other thing to S3 Few months ago. I've written a blog article by some guy from Norway who has implemented some S3 back-end code and Which sounds quite promising, but okay? I cannot tell you more about this because he haven't contributed it directly to the Wasn't that the idea of backing up S3? Not backing up 2? Might be Yeah, that can back up the data that you have in S3. Yes, that's easier than the other way around because to use S3 as a Storage even back-end that's much more difficult Yes Yes More questions yes, there's a question Yes, I think I would I would rather The question was about this there is a contributed Plug-in for postgres backup, which I think should allow incremental backup and point-and-time recovery But it's it's hard to get that up and running and and yes, I We have looked into there's a project called barman, which is made for that But that's a different approach we would rather prefer approach like we have now with the per corner extra backup plug-in which Does a similar thing for postgres? So that may come in the future. Yes So what I heard from the IntiOS Plug-in that this is really hard to maintain also and that's also the reason why we haven't spent too much effort And this just getting it roughly working and then have not continued We have a concept to implement similar functionality with Python, but I don't know missing the time to do so Postgres And then In terms of things like the bare neck and the sword that you get everything part from that Barman at the top, but if there's anyone else in a Situation I would do something like that you guys have in the pictures to why it's a good or bad approach This Question I have to repeat because I'm not sure if I had understood it so yeah So the question has been You have a barman environment for a postgres and you seem to integrate it together with sporeos So Don't see issues. This is just that these two products have Different targets to what to achieve But cover in parts are there quite redundant? So it's not a perfect solution to have them both combined or run in parallel But at the moment it's probably the best you can do but if you have Collected experiences, we would be glad if you share them on the mailing list or with other people of advice for it Okay Okay, I also have a question For the guys next to me. Yeah, um, do you have a roadmap for the near future? Yeah, we have We have some ideas to implement One of these is to extend the All rest happy in order to provide the multiple backup metals provided by johannes on the last release Uh, I think it could be a good approach to use it to back up the Linux containers inside the linux host with different Confuration files in order to back up the one each container at once with Data in the container and also The configuration files of the container could be a good idea to implement it Also, we want to extend the htdp Happy to use extend some something in rear in order to support htdp url Uh methods because in the near future we have we will have machines with ufe ufe 2.5 with htdp boot and could be a good idea to perform all the backup and the boot from htdp Could be good to make backups and recovers over one networks and we have Uh, also different things that we we we want to to solve Regarding incremental backups with relax and recover and um We want to make some changes in order to relax and recover could select the The backups stored in dlm in order to back up Uh a point in time of the incremental backups or or or choose the dr image that you want to recover from From the recovery much for of relax and recover These are some of the things that maybe not in the next release, but in the future releases near releases we will have to To to be done in order to improve and The management of the disaster recovery environment with dlm and relax and recover I don't know what you think because we are the we are looking forward to the public Of course, of course That's the nice thing about open source. We're working together and we learn from each other and uh, yeah That's the main reason we do it not only for a pleasure. It's a part of business. Yeah But okay, it's it's growing and there's a community There are nice guys who do it for free. Uh, Vladimir is one of them Who does a very good job the last couple of months For a year. Uh, at least he did some very nice things with windows. It's a hate it But he has done it He has done it But I'm glad you did it Thank you What Vladimir did that you can explain better than me what you actually did so I do not need to to to talk In some in instead of you, but if there are not so many big questions about relax and recover I would like to take the opportunity before Vladimir explains, uh, this is a block clone backup method to To tell about what I did Before reversion to Uh, you could only have one single backup in rear the backup and rear could restore the backup Now you can have multiple backups and this is uh It's what I implemented is not the final solution It's a first step to do this and I think it could become of big importance because as I mentioned in my last talk, but I Perhaps not everybody was there Because when you do only one backup and only one restore you have uh, some kind of bottleneck if you have Let's say one terabyte to backup and restore and it's let it's only one process That does it it may take a longer time But if you can split up your whole data into several separated parts Then you can backup and restore most of them simultaneously And I did tests on virtual machines and even with a single CPU and only one gigabyte of main memory I was 10 faster with two tar programs running in parallel Because of course if the one is waiting for the disks the other can can package or unpackage something And on a bigger virtual machine with four CPUs uh, I had what's this Word manager or whatever it's called it shows the CPU usage and it was 40 percent for a single backup And if I restore two in parallel, I got of course 80 percent So I can restore three backups in parallel and I think Nothing would have to wait provided The input is fast enough and on a virtual machine basically everything happens in in in memory. So I can rule this out so I can get really fast and this is the main thing of rear If the system is bigger and you can restore multiple backups you can be much faster As much as the hardware can do so you can full utilize your hardware and there is no No build in limitation in rear You only need to keep things separated and then do it all in parallel And this is a precondition for what valadimir Uh implemented to do backups of we call it alien file systems So what is not native for the linux system to to recreate? And therefore if you have several partitions one with ntfs one with Fancy fs. I don't know And you want to backup both of them. You must do it as multiple backups and you can even Hopefully probably do it in parallel Okay You said it's already Already well enough Uh, yeah, uh, exactly. It's not about backing up windows. It's about backing up all the other stuff No, just device file whatever you have in your mind It does not even have to have a file system Basically, I think everybody of you knows DD. So it basically does not care. It's so working on block level So it doesn't need to know a file system. So it rear now Basically with DD can uh do backups of whatever you have whatever file system you have in your mind And uh ntfs clone was chosen to Uh for for ntfs partitions because as you might know if you have all these large partitions DD does not know where the end of the partition is until you tell it But it basically runs through All the partitions so your backups can be really huge and ntfs address this very nicely ntfs clone sorry address this very nicely as It knows where the end of the data is on the partition. So So when I did the testing with unnamed operating system I basically had To work with basic installation which was about nine gigabytes. So it was quite acceptable So Now rear can be literally used for for backup of everything. So if you if you Do uh ask in future whether rear support something you will get answered that yes Using at least using a block alone uh backup method On that topic um How much of the use of similar context you've got with home zilin is they taking that good strategy and Uh pretty much support well Well, it you can get it to file but it's pretty good to just sort of out of the box supporting any Well the situation is very similar to clone zila if you take it, but uh clone zila can It's basically a live system So you need to I don't know If you want to run or if you do not have a dual boot you have to shut it down and do all this stuff And once you have Uh dual boot you have the linux already running. So why not to use rear for it? I'm not saying that it's it's essential or only rear can do backup of this alien files. It's basically you can do it by yourself That's no prerequisite. It's just something that is nice to have So Yeah, yeah, you are all fans of rear for good reason. I'm also fans of rear But you all have chosen to to store your backup to nfs or to something else using tar or nfs or do something else But have been your reason not to choose a open source backup solution for example barriers to to do the backup Well We as I said in in the talk, it's not The lm or relaxing recover are not that have a cap replacement It's a another choice to have a ready to recover backup from disk without using drives and tapes on your backup system and After after doing this and storing on nfs on storage You must send it to tape with bearers or or products like for backup. Okay, but uh, if you have lots of backups using Of data backups of databases applications, etc you want to To have the drives free for that And if can when when the your your drives are available and on times that your backups are done also You can then send to tape Easily without impact without impact in your shadow windows of your backups. I think this is the approach. It's not a Backup replacement never will be a backup replacement. It's an option to manage centrally in an easy manner Uh, your disaster of infrastructure and using also your standard backup solutions in order to back up the data into tapes in If you need it to recover from that and then Send to the correct system again I can give a very small example why We cannot always use barriers or some other open source. Uh, what? Todd is also an open source backup solution um You probably know in medical environments or in hospitals. There are a lot of scanners very expensive scanners I think 80 percent of the scanners in europe are recovered in tecres with rear It's a ledic system The scanners the day and they all have an disaster recovery image included which is on an dvd So the complete scanner software and operator system is on a dvd delivered to do the disaster recovery if it's required Hello, it's the os and the software to do the scanning That's a rear system A ledic system, of course, but the disaster recovery image is delivered with the system with the scanner and that's based on rear So that's one of the reasons because it's very compact and tar is fast So that's one of the reasons that Any other reason why we did not choose an open source backup as a first choice Is there are so many options? You have so many options So it was very difficult to to choose of one of them and tar was always uh, it's the oldest one, I think except of dvd, maybe And it's a very known product. It's a very important all the different Linux distributions It's uh, I don't think in the beginning there were some deviations about the verse with tar, but now they're all Equal and we don't have any issues anymore with tar. So that's the Best choice to have something working very quickly That's why we chose tar as an internal backup solution Um, but there are many more you can use rsync and there are so many commercials and open source solutions that are possible Yeah Question So for me it's a bit different Uh, call it not not really laziness, but limited time I must first and foremost care about What we have in our susie linux enterprise product and there is no barrios in there If barrios was in there, you would have a better chance, but even then it's some kind of optional But tar is always there. So It's not because I like tar more than something else. It's just So the native simplest thing that's there And when I when I do when I implement I'm I'm not so much interested in what backup tool is running I'm it's my personal interest of rear. I'm more interested in the let's call it the framework the infrastructure And the first thing I do is I implement something for the simplest thing in this case It's tar and and uh network file system And when this is done, then I can wait For users customers who say oh I want to have this for barrios and then I say no problem Talk to the barrios guys the infrastructure is now there and then we can both Try to get there that for example if it's of interest for you That also barrios can do multiple backups via rear, but you told before this You use rear only to get this as an ISO image. So it's not something That you will implement in barrios, but I only like to explain why I'm not Using barrios. I use just the simplest thing that is there. It's The reason why I asked is because in many environments it's more difficult to Many environments it's more difficult to get an NFS server Integrated instead of having another service that just Communicates with this but okay in a test environment in a linux company. It's maybe maybe here in other way I want Yeah, okay the question has been about our roadmap The PEM integration is on on the targets for 17.2 And in P improvement so for last job systems We are already supported but then we will support additional features like directly connected Tape libraries at your storage system so we can directly connect it database optimizations which improves performance quite by 100 times in some examples. Yes the short explanation is the the the database The database structure we use in barrios is normalized. That means we have The Well for each job it records which files have been backed up so To to denormalize it. We have one table called file and another table called file name So in the yeah to minimize the space. It's a normal database normalization because A lot of file names will be the same No matter which client did back them up but if we are talking about backup jobs which backup let's say 500 million files and we have Upon customer request Then it starts getting performance problems because you have you have to insert 500 million records in the file table and join that with the file name table and check which records Are already exist in the in the file name table and that costs a lot of time So the approach is and I have done some benchmarking on that to denormalize the file name table for the sake of we for sure need more storage space in the database, but it's The problem is also when the database grows It it does not scale well It takes longer and longer and longer the bigger the database is And with the denormalize approach where we directly store the file name in the file table Which for sure then has repeated records of the same file name in the database, but the insertion of the records is a lot faster and it scales It does not matter how big the database is it scales much better. That's That's the change. Yeah So what we're currently busy is is we have some large customers Who paying us to to improve the product and then it's often for for large environments and We do spotl nets they have found out there But also we have some other things like here the Python stuff we are doing and your payment equation and Yeah Enhancement in the web UI which also Is related to the stuff which is in the reos because The web UI uses the jason data which it depends on the jason data which it gets back from the from the director so that's Also a lot of work what we have also seen is that a lot of people starting with the disk space backup and the way This space backup is handled in barriers is coming from tapes you notice this in a lot of places And because it's quite confusing and needs some carefully configuration in the beginning We try to improve this also for the major version to make it also easier for for new Users to to get used to barriers and make it more efficient for the disk space backup So this is about the roadmap Okay, more question And What do we mean with capabilities as a linux context of the files or what do you mean? acms Access control Access control is Um, nothing like this you will mark the capability for article at the file and it has access only to some of the system calls They think Can't change the route but can access the systems The c groups No Well, maybe we should repeat the question first It is Well the question I will repeat the question first because otherwise it will be not recorded so The question was that with rear that did some tests with capabilities that were with tar At least not taken in account in the recovery section and they have problems with the afters in the recovers of the system It's a very good question And that's something to take in with us for the future roadmap. I think because that's indeed not yet implemented or not complete as a linux is can by default we disable it but it can be left enabled and Don't leave that but tar is indeed a bit old That's true and tar does not take the new new features in account There was some other backup solutions like star but I don't think that that star is still Doing that new stuff also Yeah, really Well, I would suggest that you create an issue for it and and at least if you said that with star it works that Tell us about it and tell how you fix it What the problem is so that we understand it very well what the problem is because It's it's it's a new request. Let's put it. It's a feature request. Just make an issue for it That's the purpose of this session. We have new features or requests Any more one issue also with the capabilities and are thinking are thinking as user system to another system and As in can handle this but you need an extra parameter that I have never seen before so Or maybe it's the same this time. All right, yeah So I Well for the request was what do we do with the deed up the duplication um within rear nothing You do At least I doesn't but I will give the mic to him Who Yeah Oh, yeah Besides I implemented support for bork backup May I like put something in between? I I often experience when there are questions about rear they are not about rear But about the various backup tools and their limitations or issues So if tar is unable to restore whatever it's called then it's not a bug in rear It's a problem in tar. It would be an issue in rear if as he told You need an option in tar and rear does just not that this option for example a newer tire version version 99 now supports Minus minus this capabilities and everything else do it right And rear does not set this option then it's an issue in rear because rear calls tar and if it can call it So that the things are done right then we can implement it in rear But if tar cannot do it because it's just not there Then we cannot implement it in rear because you know So that's must keep things separated. Okay Okay, so just just to answer a question there is a Possibility to do the the the application there is Project called bork backup. It's completely written in python. Maybe you heard about it And bork is basically integrated into rear as one of the backup methods. So If you would like to backup your tar machines, there is a possibility to use bork backup, which is Excellent in the application and can save a lot of space as at least from what I've tested Yeah on various sites, I have to say We have only limited support for d-duplication. We have some form of file based d-duplication called base drop so if you know you have a set of machines which are similar you can define a base drop and The files backup in there are not backup for for the other machines If only if there is a change to to them. So this is quite something to handle separately And yeah, there's planning to do something about this But I'm not sure when we come to this and we have some There's a project also an external contribution about to optimize or volume format that is It's better d-duplicatable by by some storage systems. So we have to split the volumes and keep the real data content from from metadata and things like this. So there is some work, but I don't see any release of this soon unfortunately And yes, there's also the one guy who have done this for the storage demon there has been a contribution which tries to It's using sqlite somehow to store the backup data and which does some d-duplication it is the the issue is that Barrios handles the volume files on disk in the same manner than it does Handled tape. So it just writes the whole backup stream to the to the volume file on disk and that's not d-duplication friendly if you use block-based d-duplication But this plugin is a python plugin as far as I know And it's at least for the sd and he will He splits the data and make checksome from this so he can do some duplication with this But yeah, it's also not integrated with Barrios and as it's using sqlite for this purpose Maybe it's will not get integrated in this form But still we are always happy if you see that people are enhancing our product. So From the DLM point of view We We are main concert is to have a disaster recovery match that can be easily moved between DLM servers between sites And I think with the application on one target site you must Send the ghoul backup of all machines to the to the destination site. Okay, and this is not the approach For us as the central manager for relax and recovery environment. It's just to being easy to To migrate machines and recover machines back up it and also do Doing changing hardware moving physical to figure because your hardware Has no maintenance now and you need to to install again on a on a new hardware with in the same Architecture, okay Also moving from virtual machines And you have you have things in different at the center moving the ghoul amount of data in in a duplication And a scenario could be a big deal To to be easy to manage in in this In this picture, okay From the DLM point of view, okay, but anyway, I think could be other options. There are some systems that support The duplication at first system level. I think jfs and I don't think I don't know if Did you see jfs? I think it has and maybe could be addressed with Building the formatting the file system with jfs on on the LMS site Maybe could help in that and that but not at the in our approach to be able to move data between the LMS servers and and being easy to To to do this. Okay. It's just the appointment from on this point of view Any question This was it for today for this death room of backup and disaster recovery I would like to thank all the presents Slipper the speakers from Barrios and John I said John Could say snow Gugallus and also I would like to thank Vladimir because for his contributes to Borg integrates and of the clone Okay, very good job My question is Is this repeatable? For next year Yeah I think we already had people that would like to have come this year, but won't be able I I Couldn't come for some reason and like to come next year. So if there's a love Okay, if you liked it, then we could try to have another death room next year Yeah And maybe Broader speakers and not only Barrios and not only real DRLM, but maybe also At least we have one Why not why not? I try to have other speakers also, but They didn't respond. So the head that chance there was only one guy from brazil Uh, they tried to come but he could may not come from his university It was a pity maybe that's okay But he promised to be here next year He already filed the request for next year It's taped, so So thank you for being here and I would say have a nice evening enjoy the evening And maybe you see each other tomorrow because we are all here tomorrow again for another Fantastic day of wisdom. Thank you very much and goodbye
 myself also from  We are open for any questions concerns  Whatever so if you have a question  The person who is addressed the question to will repeat the question in the mic  And then I'll sit on the question. Okay  It's open any questions  If you have no questions will be very short session  Who of you actively uses one of the software pieces that are  described today relax and recover whatever  So and not you do not count your I  Mean as an end user not as a developer  It's an end user so and you do not have questions  That's that's good news because it means it works  Yes, what should I say  If you're satisfied so far  But he's not a user  The user should we allow the question okay now  Yeah, so the question has been  the various team has several developers and one developer Marco van Veering has  decided to not continue with the project and he has done a lot of contributions before and  The question has been will it is slow down or development?  Definitely because he has been a good developer  But we continue we have our features the most features from barriers 16.2 have been implemented without Marco I would say  So  This had not dramatically impact. So yeah, it's it's not nice that these  Didn't continue and I would prefer it another way but  The barriers can project will of course continue and it is open source and we get also contribution from other sides  Okay, that's the center  The question has been about as we and rados  Yes, the status about this  Rados interface is available  But as far as I know slow and as far as I know there  We haven't received a lot of feedback from from this so it's not in the active focus currently  We hope this will change and maybe some people will participate or add  supported it  But yeah, it's there it does work for others, but the performance should be improved and regarding as you mentioned  And there there was some some  Experimental work done already using lip droplet which is a library to access  S3 amongst others  but  Yeah, that's the droplet is not not  advancing very much and  We also did not receive a lot of feedback regarding this  So it may be continued in the future, but currently we don't know and maybe it's also I think Amazon has also  Published some some library to access S3 for you for use with CEC plus plus  Maybe that would be a better choice to use than  droplet  One other thing to S3  Few months ago. I've written a blog article by some guy from Norway who has implemented some S3 back-end code and  Which sounds quite promising, but okay?  I cannot tell you more about this because he haven't contributed it directly to the  Wasn't that the idea of backing up S3? Not backing up 2?  Might be  Yeah, that can back up the data that you have in S3. Yes, that's easier than the other way around because  to use S3 as a  Storage even back-end that's much more difficult  Yes  Yes  More questions yes, there's a question  Yes, I think I would I would rather  The question was about this there is a contributed  Plug-in for postgres backup, which I think should allow incremental backup and point-and-time recovery  But it's it's hard to get that up and running and and yes, I  We have looked into there's a project called barman, which is made for that  But that's a different approach we would rather prefer approach like we have now with the per corner extra backup  plug-in which  Does a similar thing for postgres?  So that may come in the future. Yes  So what I heard from the  IntiOS  Plug-in that this is really hard to maintain also and that's also the reason why we haven't spent too much effort  And this just getting it roughly working and then have not continued  We have a concept to implement similar functionality with Python, but I don't know missing the time to do so  Postgres  And then  In terms of things like the bare neck and the sword that you get everything part from that  Barman at the top, but if there's anyone else in a  Situation I would do something like that you guys have in the pictures to why it's a good or bad approach  This  Question I have to repeat because I'm not sure if I had understood it so yeah  So the question has been  You have a barman environment for a postgres and you seem to integrate it together with sporeos  So  Don't see issues. This is just that these two products  have  Different targets to what to achieve  But cover in parts are there quite redundant?  So it's not a perfect solution to have them both combined or run in parallel  But at the moment it's probably the best you can do but if you have  Collected experiences, we would be glad if you share them on the mailing list or with other people of advice for it  Okay  Okay, I also have a question  For the guys next to me. Yeah, um, do you have a roadmap for the near future? Yeah, we have  We have some ideas to implement  One of these is to extend the  All rest happy in order to provide the multiple backup metals provided by johannes on the last release  Uh, I think it could be a good approach to use it to back up the  Linux containers inside the linux host with different  Confuration files in order to back up the one each container at once  with  Data in the container and also  The configuration files of the container could be a good idea to implement it  Also, we want to extend the htdp  Happy to use extend some something in rear in order to support htdp url  Uh methods because in the near future we have we will have machines with ufe  ufe 2.5 with  htdp boot  and could be a good idea to perform all the backup and the boot from htdp  Could be good to make backups and recovers  over one  networks  and  we have  Uh, also different things that we we we want to to solve  Regarding  incremental backups with relax and recover  and um  We want to make some changes in order to relax and recover  could select  the  The backups stored in dlm in order to back up  Uh a point in time of the incremental backups or or or choose the dr image that you want to recover from  From the recovery much for of relax and recover  These are some of the things that maybe not in the next release, but in the future releases  near releases we will have to  To to be done in order to improve and  The management of the disaster recovery environment with dlm and relax and recover  I don't know what you think because we are the we are looking forward to the public  Of course, of course  That's the nice thing about open source. We're working together and we learn from each other  and uh, yeah  That's the main reason we do it not only for a pleasure. It's a part of business. Yeah  But okay, it's it's growing and there's a community  There are nice guys who do it for free. Uh, Vladimir is one of them  Who does a very good job the last couple of months  For a year. Uh, at least he did some very nice things with windows. It's a hate it  But he has done it  He has done it  But I'm glad you did it  Thank you  What Vladimir did that you can explain better than me what you actually did so I do not need to to to talk  In some in instead of you, but if there are not so many big questions about relax and recover  I would like to take the opportunity  before  Vladimir explains, uh, this is a block clone backup method to  To tell about what I did  Before reversion to  Uh, you could only have one single backup in rear the backup and rear could restore the backup  Now you can have multiple backups  and this is uh  It's what I implemented is not the final solution  It's a first step to do this and I think it could become  of  big importance  because as I mentioned in my last talk, but I  Perhaps not everybody was there  Because when you do only one backup and only one restore  you have uh, some kind of bottleneck  if you have  Let's say one terabyte to backup and restore and it's let it's only one process  That does it it may take a longer time  But if you can split up your whole  data into several separated parts  Then you can backup and restore most of them simultaneously  And I did tests on virtual machines and even with a single CPU and only one gigabyte of main memory  I was 10 faster with two tar  programs running in parallel  Because of course if the one is waiting for the disks the other can can package or unpackage something  And on a bigger virtual machine with four CPUs  uh, I had  what's this  Word manager or whatever it's called it shows the CPU usage and it was 40 percent for a single backup  And if I restore two in parallel, I got of course 80 percent  So I can restore three backups in parallel  and I think  Nothing would have to wait  provided  The input is fast enough and on a virtual machine basically everything happens in in in memory. So  I can rule this out so I can get really fast and this is the main thing of rear  If the system is bigger and you can restore multiple backups you can be much faster  As much as the hardware can do  so you can full utilize your hardware and there is no  No build in limitation in rear  You only need to keep things separated and then do it all in parallel  And this is a precondition  for what valadimir  Uh implemented to do backups of we call it alien file systems  So what is not native for the linux system to to recreate?  And therefore if you have several partitions one with ntfs one with  Fancy fs. I don't know  And you want to backup both of them. You must do it as multiple backups and you can even  Hopefully probably do it in parallel  Okay  You said it's already  Already well enough  Uh, yeah, uh, exactly. It's not about backing up windows. It's about backing up all the other stuff  No, just device file whatever you have in your mind  It does not even have to have a file system  Basically, I think everybody of you knows DD. So it basically does not care. It's so  working on  block level  So it doesn't need to know a file system. So it rear now  Basically with DD can uh do backups of whatever you have whatever file system you have in your mind  And uh ntfs clone was  chosen to  Uh for for ntfs partitions because as you might know if you have all these large partitions  DD does not know where the end of the partition is until you tell it  But it basically runs through  All the partitions so your backups can be really huge and ntfs  address this very nicely  ntfs clone sorry address this very nicely as  It knows where the end of the data is on the partition. So  So when I did the testing with  unnamed operating system  I basically had  To work with basic installation which was about nine gigabytes. So it was quite acceptable  So  Now rear can be literally used for for backup of everything. So if you if you  Do uh ask in future whether rear support something you will get answered that yes  Using at least using a block alone uh backup method  On that topic um  How much of the use of similar context you've got with home zilin is they taking that good strategy and  Uh pretty much support well  Well, it you can get it to file but it's pretty good to just sort of out of the box supporting any  Well the situation is very similar to clone zila if you take it, but uh clone zila can  It's basically a live system  So you need to I don't know  If you want to run or if you do not have a dual boot you have to shut it down and do all this stuff  And once you have  Uh dual boot you have the linux already running. So why not to use rear for it?  I'm not saying that it's it's essential or only rear can do backup of this alien files. It's basically you can do it by yourself  That's no prerequisite. It's just something that is nice to have  So  Yeah, yeah, you are all fans of rear for good reason. I'm also fans of rear  But you all have chosen to to store your backup to nfs or to something else using tar or nfs or do something else  But have been your reason not to choose a open source backup solution for example barriers to to do the backup  Well  We as I said in in the talk, it's not  The lm or relaxing recover are not that have a cap replacement  It's a another choice to have a ready to recover  backup from disk without  using drives and tapes on your  backup system  and  After after doing this and storing on nfs on storage  You must send it to tape with bearers or or products like for backup. Okay, but uh, if you have lots of backups using  Of data backups of databases applications, etc  you want to  To have the drives free for that  And if can when when the your your drives are available and on times that your backups are done also  You can then send to tape  Easily without impact without impact in your shadow windows of your backups. I think this is the approach. It's not a  Backup replacement never will be a backup replacement. It's an option to manage centrally in an easy manner  Uh, your disaster of infrastructure and using also your  standard backup solutions in order to back up the data into tapes in  If you need it to recover from that and then  Send to the correct system  again  I can give a very small example  why  We cannot always use barriers or some other open source. Uh, what?  Todd is also an open source backup solution  um  You probably know in medical environments or in hospitals. There are a lot of scanners very expensive scanners  I think 80 percent of the scanners in europe are recovered in tecres with rear  It's a ledic system  The scanners the day and they all have an disaster recovery image included which is on an dvd  So the complete scanner software and operator system is on a dvd delivered to do the disaster recovery  if it's required  Hello, it's the os and the software to do the scanning  That's a rear system  A ledic system, of course, but the disaster recovery image is delivered with the system with the scanner and that's based on rear  So that's one of the reasons because it's very compact and tar is fast  So that's one of the reasons that  Any other reason why we did not choose an open source backup as a first choice  Is there are so many options?  You have so many options  So it was very difficult to to choose of one of them and tar was always uh, it's the oldest one, I think  except of dvd, maybe  And it's a very known product. It's a very important all the different  Linux distributions  It's uh, I don't think in the beginning there were some deviations about the verse with tar, but now they're all  Equal and we don't have any issues anymore with tar. So that's the  Best choice to have something working very quickly  That's why we chose tar as an internal backup solution  Um, but there are many more you can use rsync  and there are so many  commercials and open source solutions that are possible  Yeah  Question  So for me it's a bit different  Uh, call it not not really laziness, but  limited time  I must first and foremost care about  What we have in our susie linux enterprise product and there is no barrios in there  If barrios was in there, you would have a better chance, but even then it's some kind of optional  But tar is always there. So  It's not because I like tar more than something else. It's just  So the native  simplest thing that's there  And when I when I do when I implement I'm I'm not so much interested in what backup tool is running  I'm it's my personal interest of rear. I'm more interested in the let's call it the framework the infrastructure  And the first thing I do is I implement something for the simplest thing in this case  It's tar and and uh network file system  And when this is done, then I can wait  For users customers who say oh  I want to have this for barrios and then I say no problem  Talk to the barrios guys the infrastructure is now there and then we can both  Try to get there that for example if it's of interest for you  That also barrios can do multiple backups via rear, but you told before this  You use rear only to get this as an ISO image. So  it's not  something  That you will implement in barrios, but I only like to explain why I'm not  Using barrios. I use just the simplest thing that is there. It's  The reason why I asked is because in many environments it's more difficult to  Many environments it's more difficult to get an NFS server  Integrated instead of having another service that just  Communicates with this but okay in a test environment in a linux company. It's maybe maybe here in other way  I want  Yeah, okay the question has been about our roadmap  The  PEM integration is on on the targets for 17.2  And in P improvement so for last job systems  We are already supported but then we will support additional features like directly connected  Tape libraries at your storage system so we can directly connect it  database optimizations which improves performance quite by 100 times in some examples. Yes  the short explanation is the the the database  The database structure we use in barrios is normalized. That means we have  The  Well for each job it records which files have been backed up  so  To to denormalize it. We have one table called file and another table called file name  So in the yeah to minimize the space. It's a normal database normalization because  A lot of file names will be the same  No matter which client did back them up  but if we are talking about  backup jobs which backup  let's say  500 million files and we have  Upon customer request  Then it starts getting performance problems because you have you have to insert  500 million records in the file table and join that with the file name table and check  which records  Are already exist in the in the file name table and that costs a lot of time  So the approach is and I have done some benchmarking on that to denormalize the file name table for  the sake of we for sure need more storage space in the database, but it's  The problem is also when the database grows  It it does not scale well  It takes longer and longer and longer the bigger the database is  And with the denormalize approach where we directly store the file name in the file table  Which for sure then has repeated  records of the same file name in the database, but the insertion of the records is a lot faster and it scales  It does not matter how big the database is it scales much better. That's  That's the change. Yeah  So what we're currently busy is is we have some large customers  Who paying us to to improve the product and then it's often for for large environments and  We do spotl nets they have found out there  But also we have some other things like here the Python stuff we are doing and your payment equation and  Yeah  Enhancement in the web UI which also  Is related to the stuff which is in the reos because  The web UI uses the jason data which it depends on the jason data which it gets back from the  from the director so that's  Also a lot of work what we have also seen is that a lot of people starting with the disk space backup and  the way  This space backup is handled in barriers is coming from tapes you notice this in a lot of places  And because it's quite confusing and needs some carefully configuration in the beginning  We try to improve this also for the major version to make it also easier for for new  Users to to get used to barriers and make it more efficient for the disk space backup  So this is about the roadmap  Okay, more question  And  What do we mean with capabilities as a linux context of the files or what do you mean?  acms  Access control  Access control is  Um, nothing like this you will mark the capability for article at the file and it has access only to some of the system calls  They think  Can't change the route but can access the systems  The c groups  No  Well, maybe we should repeat the question first  It is  Well the question I will repeat the question first because otherwise it will be not recorded so  The question was that with rear that did some tests with capabilities that were with tar  At least not taken in account in the recovery section and they have problems with the afters in the recovers of the system  It's a very good question  And that's something to take in with us for the future roadmap. I think because that's indeed not yet  implemented or not complete  as a linux is  can  by default we disable it  but it can be left enabled  and  Don't leave that but tar is indeed  a bit old  That's true and tar does not take the new new features in account  There was some other backup solutions like star but I don't think that that star is still  Doing that new stuff also  Yeah, really  Well, I would suggest that you create an issue  for it and  and at least if you said that with star it works that  Tell us about it and tell how you fix it  What the problem is so that we understand it very well what the problem is  because  It's it's it's a new request. Let's put it. It's a feature request. Just make an issue for it  That's the purpose of this session. We have new features or requests  Any more  one issue also with the capabilities and are thinking are thinking as user system to another system and  As in can handle this but you need an extra parameter that I have never seen before so  Or maybe it's the same this time. All right, yeah  So  I  Well for the request was what do we do with the deed up the duplication  um within rear nothing  You do  At least I doesn't but I will give the mic to him  Who  Yeah  Oh, yeah  Besides I implemented support for bork backup  May I like put something in between?  I I often experience when there are questions about rear they are not about rear  But about the various backup tools and their limitations or issues  So if tar is unable to restore whatever it's called then it's not a bug in rear  It's a problem in tar. It would be an issue in rear if as he told  You need an option in tar and rear does just not that this option  for example a newer tire version version 99 now supports  Minus minus this capabilities and everything else do it right  And rear does not set this option then it's an issue in rear because rear calls tar and if it can call it  So that the things are done right then we can implement it in rear  But if tar cannot do it because it's just not there  Then we cannot implement it in rear because you know  So that's must keep things separated. Okay  Okay, so just just to answer a question there is a  Possibility to do the the the application  there is  Project called bork backup. It's completely written in python. Maybe you heard about it  And bork is basically integrated into rear as one of the backup methods. So  If you would like to backup your tar machines, there is a possibility to use bork backup, which is  Excellent in the application and can save a lot of space as at least from what I've tested  Yeah on various sites, I have to say  We have only limited support for d-duplication. We have some form of file based d-duplication called base drop  so if you know you have a set of machines which are similar you can  define a base drop and  The files backup in there are not backup for for the other machines  If only if there is a change to to them. So this is quite something to handle separately  And yeah, there's planning to do something about this  But I'm not sure when we come to this and  we have some  There's a project also an external contribution about to optimize or volume format that is  It's better d-duplicatable by by some storage systems. So we have to split the volumes and keep the  real data content from from metadata and things like this. So there is some work, but  I don't see any release of this soon unfortunately  And yes, there's also the one guy who have done this for the storage demon there has been a contribution  which  tries to  It's using  sqlite somehow to store the backup data and which does some d-duplication  it is the the issue is that  Barrios handles the volume files on disk in the same manner than it does  Handled tape. So it just writes the whole backup stream  to the to the volume file on disk and that's not d-duplication friendly if you use  block-based d-duplication  But this plugin is a python plugin as far as I know  And it's at least for the sd and he will  He splits the data and make checksome from this so he can do some duplication with this  But yeah, it's also not integrated with Barrios and as it's using sqlite for this purpose  Maybe it's will not get integrated in this form  But still we are always happy if you see that people are enhancing our product. So  From the DLM point of view  We  We are main concert is to have a disaster recovery match that can be easily moved between DLM servers between sites  And I think with the application on one target site you must  Send the ghoul backup of all machines to the to the destination site. Okay, and this is not the approach  For us as the central manager for relax and recovery environment. It's just to being easy to  To migrate machines and recover machines back up it and also do  Doing changing hardware moving physical to figure because your hardware  Has no maintenance now and you need to to install again on a on a new hardware  with in the same  Architecture, okay  Also moving from virtual machines  And you have you have things in different at the center moving the ghoul amount of data in in a duplication  And a scenario could be a big deal  To to be easy to manage  in in this  In this picture, okay  From the DLM point of view, okay, but anyway, I think could be other options. There are some systems that support  The duplication at first system level. I think jfs and I don't think I don't know if  Did you see jfs? I think it has and maybe could be addressed with  Building the formatting the file system with jfs on on the LMS site  Maybe could help in that and that but not at the in our approach to be able to move data between the LMS servers and and being easy to  To to do this. Okay. It's just the appointment from on this point of view  Any question  This was it for today for this death room of backup and disaster recovery  I would like to thank all the presents  Slipper the speakers  from Barrios and John  I said John  Could say snow  Gugallus and also I would like to thank Vladimir because for his contributes to Borg integrates and of the clone  Okay, very good job  My question is  Is this repeatable?  For next year  Yeah  I think we already had people that would like to have come this year, but won't be able I  I  Couldn't come for some reason and like to come next year. So if there's a love  Okay, if you liked it, then we could try to have another death room next year  Yeah  And maybe  Broader speakers and not only Barrios and not only real DRLM, but maybe also  At least we have one  Why not why not? I try to have other speakers also, but  They didn't respond. So the head that chance there was only one guy from brazil  Uh, they tried to come but he could may not come from his university  It was a pity maybe that's okay  But he promised to be here next year  He already filed the request for next year  It's taped, so  So thank you for being here and I would say have a nice evening enjoy the evening  And maybe you see each other tomorrow because we are all here tomorrow again for another  Fantastic day of wisdom. Thank you very much and goodbye
Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_0_131.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_132_935.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_936_983.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_984_1079.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_1080_1139.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_1140_1367.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_1368_1439.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_1440_1631.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_1632_2135.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_2136_2231.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_2232_2843.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_2844_4607.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_4608_4727.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_4728_6167.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_6168_6491.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_6492_10427.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_10428_13343.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_13344_17891.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_17892_18539.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_18540_19379.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_19380_23711.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_23712_28127.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_28128_28187.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_28188_28847.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_28848_50987.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_50988_51071.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_51072_51395.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_51396_51911.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_51912_52367.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_52368_53315.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_53316_53963.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_53964_54047.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_54048_56387.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_56388_59471.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_59472_59783.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_59784_60815.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_60816_60983.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_60984_61151.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_61152_61247.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_61248_61475.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_61476_62015.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_62016_63347.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_63348_63743.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_63744_63851.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_63852_63899.png Future_ideas_for_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_Talk_with_ReaR_DRLM_and_Bareos_users_about_what_they_like_63900_64019.png
myself also from We are open for any questions concerns Whatever so if you have a question The person who is addressed the question to will repeat the question in the mic And then I'll sit on the question. Okay It's open any questions If you have no questions will be very short session Who of you actively uses one of the software pieces that are described today relax and recover whatever So and not you do not count your I Mean as an end user not as a developer It's an end user so and you do not have questions That's that's good news because it means it works Yes, what should I say If you're satisfied so far But he's not a user The user should we allow the question okay now Yeah, so the question has been the various team has several developers and one developer Marco van Veering has decided to not continue with the project and he has done a lot of contributions before and The question has been will it is slow down or development? Definitely because he has been a good developer But we continue we have our features the most features from barriers 16.2 have been implemented without Marco I would say So This had not dramatically impact. So yeah, it's it's not nice that these Didn't continue and I would prefer it another way but The barriers can project will of course continue and it is open source and we get also contribution from other sides Okay, that's the center The question has been about as we and rados Yes, the status about this Rados interface is available But as far as I know slow and as far as I know there We haven't received a lot of feedback from from this so it's not in the active focus currently We hope this will change and maybe some people will participate or add supported it But yeah, it's there it does work for others, but the performance should be improved and regarding as you mentioned And there there was some some Experimental work done already using lip droplet which is a library to access S3 amongst others but Yeah, that's the droplet is not not advancing very much and We also did not receive a lot of feedback regarding this So it may be continued in the future, but currently we don't know and maybe it's also I think Amazon has also Published some some library to access S3 for you for use with CEC plus plus Maybe that would be a better choice to use than droplet One other thing to S3 Few months ago. I've written a blog article by some guy from Norway who has implemented some S3 back-end code and Which sounds quite promising, but okay? I cannot tell you more about this because he haven't contributed it directly to the Wasn't that the idea of backing up S3? Not backing up 2? Might be Yeah, that can back up the data that you have in S3. Yes, that's easier than the other way around because to use S3 as a Storage even back-end that's much more difficult Yes Yes More questions yes, there's a question Yes, I think I would I would rather The question was about this there is a contributed Plug-in for postgres backup, which I think should allow incremental backup and point-and-time recovery But it's it's hard to get that up and running and and yes, I We have looked into there's a project called barman, which is made for that But that's a different approach we would rather prefer approach like we have now with the per corner extra backup plug-in which Does a similar thing for postgres? So that may come in the future. Yes So what I heard from the IntiOS Plug-in that this is really hard to maintain also and that's also the reason why we haven't spent too much effort And this just getting it roughly working and then have not continued We have a concept to implement similar functionality with Python, but I don't know missing the time to do so Postgres And then In terms of things like the bare neck and the sword that you get everything part from that Barman at the top, but if there's anyone else in a Situation I would do something like that you guys have in the pictures to why it's a good or bad approach This Question I have to repeat because I'm not sure if I had understood it so yeah So the question has been You have a barman environment for a postgres and you seem to integrate it together with sporeos So Don't see issues. This is just that these two products have Different targets to what to achieve But cover in parts are there quite redundant? So it's not a perfect solution to have them both combined or run in parallel But at the moment it's probably the best you can do but if you have Collected experiences, we would be glad if you share them on the mailing list or with other people of advice for it Okay Okay, I also have a question For the guys next to me. Yeah, um, do you have a roadmap for the near future? Yeah, we have We have some ideas to implement One of these is to extend the All rest happy in order to provide the multiple backup metals provided by johannes on the last release Uh, I think it could be a good approach to use it to back up the Linux containers inside the linux host with different Confuration files in order to back up the one each container at once with Data in the container and also The configuration files of the container could be a good idea to implement it Also, we want to extend the htdp Happy to use extend some something in rear in order to support htdp url Uh methods because in the near future we have we will have machines with ufe ufe 2.5 with htdp boot and could be a good idea to perform all the backup and the boot from htdp Could be good to make backups and recovers over one networks and we have Uh, also different things that we we we want to to solve Regarding incremental backups with relax and recover and um We want to make some changes in order to relax and recover could select the The backups stored in dlm in order to back up Uh a point in time of the incremental backups or or or choose the dr image that you want to recover from From the recovery much for of relax and recover These are some of the things that maybe not in the next release, but in the future releases near releases we will have to To to be done in order to improve and The management of the disaster recovery environment with dlm and relax and recover I don't know what you think because we are the we are looking forward to the public Of course, of course That's the nice thing about open source. We're working together and we learn from each other and uh, yeah That's the main reason we do it not only for a pleasure. It's a part of business. Yeah But okay, it's it's growing and there's a community There are nice guys who do it for free. Uh, Vladimir is one of them Who does a very good job the last couple of months For a year. Uh, at least he did some very nice things with windows. It's a hate it But he has done it He has done it But I'm glad you did it Thank you What Vladimir did that you can explain better than me what you actually did so I do not need to to to talk In some in instead of you, but if there are not so many big questions about relax and recover I would like to take the opportunity before Vladimir explains, uh, this is a block clone backup method to To tell about what I did Before reversion to Uh, you could only have one single backup in rear the backup and rear could restore the backup Now you can have multiple backups and this is uh It's what I implemented is not the final solution It's a first step to do this and I think it could become of big importance because as I mentioned in my last talk, but I Perhaps not everybody was there Because when you do only one backup and only one restore you have uh, some kind of bottleneck if you have Let's say one terabyte to backup and restore and it's let it's only one process That does it it may take a longer time But if you can split up your whole data into several separated parts Then you can backup and restore most of them simultaneously And I did tests on virtual machines and even with a single CPU and only one gigabyte of main memory I was 10 faster with two tar programs running in parallel Because of course if the one is waiting for the disks the other can can package or unpackage something And on a bigger virtual machine with four CPUs uh, I had what's this Word manager or whatever it's called it shows the CPU usage and it was 40 percent for a single backup And if I restore two in parallel, I got of course 80 percent So I can restore three backups in parallel and I think Nothing would have to wait provided The input is fast enough and on a virtual machine basically everything happens in in in memory. So I can rule this out so I can get really fast and this is the main thing of rear If the system is bigger and you can restore multiple backups you can be much faster As much as the hardware can do so you can full utilize your hardware and there is no No build in limitation in rear You only need to keep things separated and then do it all in parallel And this is a precondition for what valadimir Uh implemented to do backups of we call it alien file systems So what is not native for the linux system to to recreate? And therefore if you have several partitions one with ntfs one with Fancy fs. I don't know And you want to backup both of them. You must do it as multiple backups and you can even Hopefully probably do it in parallel Okay You said it's already Already well enough Uh, yeah, uh, exactly. It's not about backing up windows. It's about backing up all the other stuff No, just device file whatever you have in your mind It does not even have to have a file system Basically, I think everybody of you knows DD. So it basically does not care. It's so working on block level So it doesn't need to know a file system. So it rear now Basically with DD can uh do backups of whatever you have whatever file system you have in your mind And uh ntfs clone was chosen to Uh for for ntfs partitions because as you might know if you have all these large partitions DD does not know where the end of the partition is until you tell it But it basically runs through All the partitions so your backups can be really huge and ntfs address this very nicely ntfs clone sorry address this very nicely as It knows where the end of the data is on the partition. So So when I did the testing with unnamed operating system I basically had To work with basic installation which was about nine gigabytes. So it was quite acceptable So Now rear can be literally used for for backup of everything. So if you if you Do uh ask in future whether rear support something you will get answered that yes Using at least using a block alone uh backup method On that topic um How much of the use of similar context you've got with home zilin is they taking that good strategy and Uh pretty much support well Well, it you can get it to file but it's pretty good to just sort of out of the box supporting any Well the situation is very similar to clone zila if you take it, but uh clone zila can It's basically a live system So you need to I don't know If you want to run or if you do not have a dual boot you have to shut it down and do all this stuff And once you have Uh dual boot you have the linux already running. So why not to use rear for it? I'm not saying that it's it's essential or only rear can do backup of this alien files. It's basically you can do it by yourself That's no prerequisite. It's just something that is nice to have So Yeah, yeah, you are all fans of rear for good reason. I'm also fans of rear But you all have chosen to to store your backup to nfs or to something else using tar or nfs or do something else But have been your reason not to choose a open source backup solution for example barriers to to do the backup Well We as I said in in the talk, it's not The lm or relaxing recover are not that have a cap replacement It's a another choice to have a ready to recover backup from disk without using drives and tapes on your backup system and After after doing this and storing on nfs on storage You must send it to tape with bearers or or products like for backup. Okay, but uh, if you have lots of backups using Of data backups of databases applications, etc you want to To have the drives free for that And if can when when the your your drives are available and on times that your backups are done also You can then send to tape Easily without impact without impact in your shadow windows of your backups. I think this is the approach. It's not a Backup replacement never will be a backup replacement. It's an option to manage centrally in an easy manner Uh, your disaster of infrastructure and using also your standard backup solutions in order to back up the data into tapes in If you need it to recover from that and then Send to the correct system again I can give a very small example why We cannot always use barriers or some other open source. Uh, what? Todd is also an open source backup solution um You probably know in medical environments or in hospitals. There are a lot of scanners very expensive scanners I think 80 percent of the scanners in europe are recovered in tecres with rear It's a ledic system The scanners the day and they all have an disaster recovery image included which is on an dvd So the complete scanner software and operator system is on a dvd delivered to do the disaster recovery if it's required Hello, it's the os and the software to do the scanning That's a rear system A ledic system, of course, but the disaster recovery image is delivered with the system with the scanner and that's based on rear So that's one of the reasons because it's very compact and tar is fast So that's one of the reasons that Any other reason why we did not choose an open source backup as a first choice Is there are so many options? You have so many options So it was very difficult to to choose of one of them and tar was always uh, it's the oldest one, I think except of dvd, maybe And it's a very known product. It's a very important all the different Linux distributions It's uh, I don't think in the beginning there were some deviations about the verse with tar, but now they're all Equal and we don't have any issues anymore with tar. So that's the Best choice to have something working very quickly That's why we chose tar as an internal backup solution Um, but there are many more you can use rsync and there are so many commercials and open source solutions that are possible Yeah Question So for me it's a bit different Uh, call it not not really laziness, but limited time I must first and foremost care about What we have in our susie linux enterprise product and there is no barrios in there If barrios was in there, you would have a better chance, but even then it's some kind of optional But tar is always there. So It's not because I like tar more than something else. It's just So the native simplest thing that's there And when I when I do when I implement I'm I'm not so much interested in what backup tool is running I'm it's my personal interest of rear. I'm more interested in the let's call it the framework the infrastructure And the first thing I do is I implement something for the simplest thing in this case It's tar and and uh network file system And when this is done, then I can wait For users customers who say oh I want to have this for barrios and then I say no problem Talk to the barrios guys the infrastructure is now there and then we can both Try to get there that for example if it's of interest for you That also barrios can do multiple backups via rear, but you told before this You use rear only to get this as an ISO image. So it's not something That you will implement in barrios, but I only like to explain why I'm not Using barrios. I use just the simplest thing that is there. It's The reason why I asked is because in many environments it's more difficult to Many environments it's more difficult to get an NFS server Integrated instead of having another service that just Communicates with this but okay in a test environment in a linux company. It's maybe maybe here in other way I want Yeah, okay the question has been about our roadmap The PEM integration is on on the targets for 17.2 And in P improvement so for last job systems We are already supported but then we will support additional features like directly connected Tape libraries at your storage system so we can directly connect it database optimizations which improves performance quite by 100 times in some examples. Yes the short explanation is the the the database The database structure we use in barrios is normalized. That means we have The Well for each job it records which files have been backed up so To to denormalize it. We have one table called file and another table called file name So in the yeah to minimize the space. It's a normal database normalization because A lot of file names will be the same No matter which client did back them up but if we are talking about backup jobs which backup let's say 500 million files and we have Upon customer request Then it starts getting performance problems because you have you have to insert 500 million records in the file table and join that with the file name table and check which records Are already exist in the in the file name table and that costs a lot of time So the approach is and I have done some benchmarking on that to denormalize the file name table for the sake of we for sure need more storage space in the database, but it's The problem is also when the database grows It it does not scale well It takes longer and longer and longer the bigger the database is And with the denormalize approach where we directly store the file name in the file table Which for sure then has repeated records of the same file name in the database, but the insertion of the records is a lot faster and it scales It does not matter how big the database is it scales much better. That's That's the change. Yeah So what we're currently busy is is we have some large customers Who paying us to to improve the product and then it's often for for large environments and We do spotl nets they have found out there But also we have some other things like here the Python stuff we are doing and your payment equation and Yeah Enhancement in the web UI which also Is related to the stuff which is in the reos because The web UI uses the jason data which it depends on the jason data which it gets back from the from the director so that's Also a lot of work what we have also seen is that a lot of people starting with the disk space backup and the way This space backup is handled in barriers is coming from tapes you notice this in a lot of places And because it's quite confusing and needs some carefully configuration in the beginning We try to improve this also for the major version to make it also easier for for new Users to to get used to barriers and make it more efficient for the disk space backup So this is about the roadmap Okay, more question And What do we mean with capabilities as a linux context of the files or what do you mean? acms Access control Access control is Um, nothing like this you will mark the capability for article at the file and it has access only to some of the system calls They think Can't change the route but can access the systems The c groups No Well, maybe we should repeat the question first It is Well the question I will repeat the question first because otherwise it will be not recorded so The question was that with rear that did some tests with capabilities that were with tar At least not taken in account in the recovery section and they have problems with the afters in the recovers of the system It's a very good question And that's something to take in with us for the future roadmap. I think because that's indeed not yet implemented or not complete as a linux is can by default we disable it but it can be left enabled and Don't leave that but tar is indeed a bit old That's true and tar does not take the new new features in account There was some other backup solutions like star but I don't think that that star is still Doing that new stuff also Yeah, really Well, I would suggest that you create an issue for it and and at least if you said that with star it works that Tell us about it and tell how you fix it What the problem is so that we understand it very well what the problem is because It's it's it's a new request. Let's put it. It's a feature request. Just make an issue for it That's the purpose of this session. We have new features or requests Any more one issue also with the capabilities and are thinking are thinking as user system to another system and As in can handle this but you need an extra parameter that I have never seen before so Or maybe it's the same this time. All right, yeah So I Well for the request was what do we do with the deed up the duplication um within rear nothing You do At least I doesn't but I will give the mic to him Who Yeah Oh, yeah Besides I implemented support for bork backup May I like put something in between? I I often experience when there are questions about rear they are not about rear But about the various backup tools and their limitations or issues So if tar is unable to restore whatever it's called then it's not a bug in rear It's a problem in tar. It would be an issue in rear if as he told You need an option in tar and rear does just not that this option for example a newer tire version version 99 now supports Minus minus this capabilities and everything else do it right And rear does not set this option then it's an issue in rear because rear calls tar and if it can call it So that the things are done right then we can implement it in rear But if tar cannot do it because it's just not there Then we cannot implement it in rear because you know So that's must keep things separated. Okay Okay, so just just to answer a question there is a Possibility to do the the the application there is Project called bork backup. It's completely written in python. Maybe you heard about it And bork is basically integrated into rear as one of the backup methods. So If you would like to backup your tar machines, there is a possibility to use bork backup, which is Excellent in the application and can save a lot of space as at least from what I've tested Yeah on various sites, I have to say We have only limited support for d-duplication. We have some form of file based d-duplication called base drop so if you know you have a set of machines which are similar you can define a base drop and The files backup in there are not backup for for the other machines If only if there is a change to to them. So this is quite something to handle separately And yeah, there's planning to do something about this But I'm not sure when we come to this and we have some There's a project also an external contribution about to optimize or volume format that is It's better d-duplicatable by by some storage systems. So we have to split the volumes and keep the real data content from from metadata and things like this. So there is some work, but I don't see any release of this soon unfortunately And yes, there's also the one guy who have done this for the storage demon there has been a contribution which tries to It's using sqlite somehow to store the backup data and which does some d-duplication it is the the issue is that Barrios handles the volume files on disk in the same manner than it does Handled tape. So it just writes the whole backup stream to the to the volume file on disk and that's not d-duplication friendly if you use block-based d-duplication But this plugin is a python plugin as far as I know And it's at least for the sd and he will He splits the data and make checksome from this so he can do some duplication with this But yeah, it's also not integrated with Barrios and as it's using sqlite for this purpose Maybe it's will not get integrated in this form But still we are always happy if you see that people are enhancing our product. So From the DLM point of view We We are main concert is to have a disaster recovery match that can be easily moved between DLM servers between sites And I think with the application on one target site you must Send the ghoul backup of all machines to the to the destination site. Okay, and this is not the approach For us as the central manager for relax and recovery environment. It's just to being easy to To migrate machines and recover machines back up it and also do Doing changing hardware moving physical to figure because your hardware Has no maintenance now and you need to to install again on a on a new hardware with in the same Architecture, okay Also moving from virtual machines And you have you have things in different at the center moving the ghoul amount of data in in a duplication And a scenario could be a big deal To to be easy to manage in in this In this picture, okay From the DLM point of view, okay, but anyway, I think could be other options. There are some systems that support The duplication at first system level. I think jfs and I don't think I don't know if Did you see jfs? I think it has and maybe could be addressed with Building the formatting the file system with jfs on on the LMS site Maybe could help in that and that but not at the in our approach to be able to move data between the LMS servers and and being easy to To to do this. Okay. It's just the appointment from on this point of view Any question This was it for today for this death room of backup and disaster recovery I would like to thank all the presents Slipper the speakers from Barrios and John I said John Could say snow Gugallus and also I would like to thank Vladimir because for his contributes to Borg integrates and of the clone Okay, very good job My question is Is this repeatable? For next year Yeah I think we already had people that would like to have come this year, but won't be able I I Couldn't come for some reason and like to come next year. So if there's a love Okay, if you liked it, then we could try to have another death room next year Yeah And maybe Broader speakers and not only Barrios and not only real DRLM, but maybe also At least we have one Why not why not? I try to have other speakers also, but They didn't respond. So the head that chance there was only one guy from brazil Uh, they tried to come but he could may not come from his university It was a pity maybe that's okay But he promised to be here next year He already filed the request for next year It's taped, so So thank you for being here and I would say have a nice evening enjoy the evening And maybe you see each other tomorrow because we are all here tomorrow again for another Fantastic day of wisdom. Thank you very much and goodbye
that you get everything part from that Barman at a block clone backup method to To tell about what nicely as It knows where the end of the data is everything. So if you if you Do uh ask in future backup as a first choice Is there are so many the way This space backup is handled in barriers have new features or requests Any more one issue also with the capabilities and are thinking are we already had people that would like to have