Backup taking too long after migration to SQL 2008 R2

Question

Backup taking too long after migration to SQL 2008 R2

Viewing 11 posts - 16 through 25 (of 25 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Jack Corbett SSC Guru Points: 184393 More actions · Answer 1

apat (4/24/2013)
Cluster is made of Dell R815 server. With Intel x570 10GB NICs connected to Cisco Nexus 5596 Switch through a coper twinex cables. That is connected to EMC VNX 5500 SAN with 10GB fiber. Protocol throughout is iSCSI. SAN is made up of SSDs and capable of over 35000 IOPS/second.

Have you verified that you are getting 10GB through to the SAN? It certainly doesn't sound like you are.

Have you gotten your SAN admins involved to see what they can offer?

Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 735698 More actions · Answer 2

SQL Server 2008 R2 is not slower running backups. In all likelihood you have some configuration or hardware issue with your connection to the SAN. Have you looked at wait stats from inside SQL Server?

If you run queries to this disk, or copy data there, can you get an expected rate of transfer?

http://blog.sqlauthority.com/2011/02/14/sql-server-backupio-backupbuffer-wait-type-day-14-of-28/

apat SSCertifiable Points: 5929 More actions · Answer 3

Infrastructure team is looking at the hardware configuration to find any possible issues there. While backup is running I see BACKUPIO and BACKUPBUFFER wait types.

Jack Corbett SSC Guru Points: 184393 More actions · Answer 4

apat (4/24/2013)
Infrastructure team is looking at the hardware configuration to find any possible issues there. While backup is running I see BACKUPIO and BACKUPBUFFER wait types.

Those both point to the IO system not being able to keep up.

Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question

jens.riis SSC Rookie Points: 49 More actions · Answer 5

Is power scheme high performance?

I have had problems with balanced

apat SSCertifiable Points: 5929 More actions · Answer 6

Infrastructure team discovered a SAN issue. It is performing very slow and hardly 10 MB/s reads. Thanks for all your help, I will update the post with the resolution soon.

SQListic SSCertifiable Points: 6904 More actions · Answer 7

SQListic

SSCertifiable

Points: 6904

April 25, 2013 at 4:02 pm

#1610151

Let us know

Thank u

apat SSCertifiable Points: 5929 More actions · Answer 8

change was made to removing native Windows MPIO and installing EMC's Powerpath management software, MPIO was not handling I/O properly and some of the paths to the storage were not utilized resulting in increased latency.

Increased the Receive/Transmission Scaling Size window on the Intel 10G cards from 725 to 2048, increasing this setting helps when attempting to send large I/O blocks over the network.

Backup size of 500 GB database came down from 6 hours to 2.40 hours. 1:30 is the actual backup and remaining time for verifying the backup file.

Geoff A SSChampion Points: 11511 More actions · Answer 9

Still not the 40 minutes you claimed to get on the old server...... but 1:30 for 500GB is pretty decent.

apat SSCertifiable Points: 5929 More actions · Answer 10

yes still working to get close to 40 mins. I think that's the trade off between local backup Vs on SAN.

Geoff A SSChampion Points: 11511 More actions · Answer 11

i think you would find that a properly configured SAN will almost always be faster than local disks. of course, your mileage will vary.

you could have 8 internal SSD drives with a high capicity RAID card running RAID 10 that will probably be faster than a SAN.

all SAN admins are not created equal... 😀