Backup Part 5: Testing Bacula and Veeam Backup for Linux

This article will look at various “large” backup software, including commercial ones. List of candidates: Veeam Agent for Linux, Bacula.

The work with the file system will be checked to make it convenient to compare with previous candidates.

Expected results

Since both candidates are universal ready-made solutions, the most important result will be predictability of work, namely, the same work time when processing the same amount of data, as well as the same load.

Veeam Agent Review for Linux

This backup program works with block devices, for which it has a module for the Linux kernel, which ensures the integrity of the backup copy by tracking the changed data blocks. A more detailed description is here .

The process of creating a file backup works on the basis of the same kernel module: a block device nugget is created, which is mounted in a temporary directory, and then data is synchronized by file from an nugget to another local directory, or deleted using the smb or nfs protocol, where several files are created in proprietary format.

The process of creating a file backup could not be completed. At about 15-16% of the execution speed dropped to 600 kb / s and below, with 50% cpu usage, which potentially led to 6-7 hours of backup process, so the process was stopped.

An application was created for technical support for Veeam, whose employees suggested using block-by-block mode as a solution.

In general, quite good impressions of the program, but in the general overview it will not be taken into account due to the very large sluggishness of the file mode of operation.

Review Bacula

Bacula - client-server software for creating backup copies, logically consists of several parts, each of which performs its part of the work. There is a Director, which serves to manage, FileDaemon - the service responsible for backup, StorageDaemon - a backup storage service, Console - an interface to the Director (there are TUI, GUI, Web options). This complex is also included in the review because, despite a significantly large threshold of entry, it is quite a popular means of organizing backup.

In general, one can see uniform load on one processor core, as well as the fact that the indicators are similar to regular tar with activated compression. Due to the fact that the bacula settings for backup are very, very extensive - there was no clear advantage to show.

results

In general, the situation is unfavorable for both candidates, most likely due to the fact that the backup file mode is being used. In the next part, we will also consider the recovery process from backups, general conclusions can be made from the total time.

Announcement

Backup, Part 1: Why do I need backup, review of methods, technologies
Backup, part 2: Review and test rsync-based backup tools
Backup, part 3: Review and testing duplicity, duplicati
Backup, part 4: zbackup, restic, borgbackup review and testing
Backup Part 5: Testing Bacula and Veeam Backup for Linux
Backup Part 6: Comparing Backup Tools
Backup, Part 7: Conclusions

Publisher: Pavel Demkovich