CrashPlan Performance, Plugin vs. iohyve/bhyve VM

[nello]

I'm curious what other people are seeing in the way of CrashPlan performance in iohyve/bhyve VM vs. the plugin.

When I was running the CrashPlan plugin, I got a fairly steady 7Mbps. With a Ubuntu 16 VM, I'm seeing anywhere from 20-110Mbps.

Are others also seeing a 10x performance improvement?

 

[fracai]

I can't speak to the upload speeds, but when I was running in a jail I would see a spike of CPU activity every night when it scanned and uploaded. With it running in bhyve I can hardly see the impact on CPU. I think it's more of a RAM impact, but that might just be a difference in reporting.

 

[lmannyr]

When I initially start Crashplan, upload speeds are in the 200-350Mb/s. After about 5-10 min, it trends down to about 11-13 where it stays. Not sure if thats an ISP thing or the little RAM I have set for the VM. I set 2GB RAM for Ubuntu. Since CrashPlan has been running in the ubuntu VM, the FREENAS Xeon processor fan is at max RPM of 2000 (stock fan). FreeNAS reports CPU usage at 15%.

 

[scrappy]

When I initially start Crashplan, upload speeds are in the 200-350Mb/s. After about 5-10 min, it trends down to about 11-13 where it stays. Not sure if thats an ISP thing or the little RAM I have set for the VM. I set 2GB RAM for Ubuntu. Since CrashPlan has been running in the ubuntu VM, the FREENAS Xeon processor fan is at max RPM of 2000 (stock fan). FreeNAS reports CPU usage at 15%.

I get the same initial network speed peaks on every system I run Crashplan on. While only a guess, what I think is happening here is Crashplan syncing up files between host and remote CP datasets. Perhaps this makes CP appear to be speeding along at a blisteringly fast pace at start when it actuality isn't and cannot. Case in point: my ISP limits my uploads ~6Mbps. Nothing I do can bypass this limit and therefore when Crashplan shows 100+ Mbps uploads to Crashplan Central we know this to be untrue.

 

[fracai]

I think there's an option to switch between "actual" and "effective" upload rate, where "effective" (or whatever it's called) takes compression, deduplication, and incremental backups in to consideration when reporting the rate. In other words, "actual" is how fast data is being transferred, "effective" pretends you're starting from no data uploaded and reports how fast you're moving through your whole set of data.