-
|
I'm stumped and never had this problem until a week or so ago. No matter what changes I make to the Performance tab, I am stuck at 15mbit per second upload -- regardless of the file size (ie upload speed of a 4GB video is still only 15mbit total). My connection is gigabit and if I run a speedtest from my Unraid server, I get between 750mbit and 900mbit, so it's not a network issue, so far as I can tell. Backblaze used to completely push my system and use like 99% of CPU, pretty constantly, while uploading. Not I'm seeing much lower usage. No idea what changes or how to fix it |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 44 comments 55 replies
-
|
Hey @newoski Do you have a symmetrical gigabit connection (1gbit down / 1gbit up)? You can then set the threads to 100, if the file is large enough (at least 10GB) it should saturate your upload. This also depends on your CPU and RAM. The more threads, the more CPU/RAM will be used. So - "what changes and how to fix" is hard to answer. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
1. Initial backup is not done
2. Current CPU usage fluctuates second to second between like 30-60%. It
used to sti pretty much above 90% when it was uploading faster in the past
3. RAM usage is at about 20% of 32GB
4. None of the slow files are small -- if they were, I would assume that
was the cause. They're all over a gig, some as big as 70GB
5. Symmetrical connection of about 350mbit up/down. I will occasionally see
a gigabit up/down when speed testing via unraid, but I'm only paying for
350/350 and I get 350/350 pretty consistently
6. Gigabit ethernet connection and if I do a LAN speed test I'm seeing
gigabit speeds
7. I've tried Inherit Backup and fresh backups. Both experience the slow
speeds with large files
…On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 9:55 AM Thomas ***@***.***> wrote:
Hey @newoski <https://github.com/newoski>
I'd say that this is hard to diagnose. It depends on so many factors:
threads you selected for backup and your Backblaze client settings, current
Bandwith constraints at Backblaze datacenter itself, etc.
Do you have a symmetrical gigabit connection (1gbit down / 1gbit up)? You
can then set the threads to 100, if the file is large enough (at least
10GB) it should saturate your upload. This also depends on your CPU and
RAM. The more threads, the more CPU/RAM will be used.
If the initial backup is done, Backblaze scans your drives for new files
and puts it in the upload queue (small files first).
So If you have many small files to back up, the upload will be very slow.
So - "what changes and how to fix" is hard to answer.
Is your initial backup already done?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#127 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJGHKXNWBJVAKHKZPID333YUS2NRAVCNFSM6AAAAABDPYME5GVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSNJUGM4TEMZUGE>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
<JonathanTreffler/backblaze-personal-wine-container/issues/127/1954392341@
github.com>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Sorry, forgot to mention... changing threads has zero impact on this, and
the 15mbit is constant around the clock all day long, so I don't think it's
a data center issue
…On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 10:38 AM Owen Sakovics ***@***.***> wrote:
1. Initial backup is not done
2. Current CPU usage fluctuates second to second between like 30-60%. It
used to sti pretty much above 90% when it was uploading faster in the past
3. RAM usage is at about 20% of 32GB
4. None of the slow files are small -- if they were, I would assume that
was the cause. They're all over a gig, some as big as 70GB
5. Symmetrical connection of about 350mbit up/down. I will
occasionally see a gigabit up/down when speed testing via unraid, but I'm
only paying for 350/350 and I get 350/350 pretty consistently
6. Gigabit ethernet connection and if I do a LAN speed test I'm seeing
gigabit speeds
7. I've tried Inherit Backup and fresh backups. Both experience the slow
speeds with large files
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 9:55 AM Thomas ***@***.***> wrote:
> Hey @newoski <https://github.com/newoski>
> I'd say that this is hard to diagnose. It depends on so many factors:
> threads you selected for backup and your Backblaze client settings, current
> Bandwith constraints at Backblaze datacenter itself, etc.
>
> Do you have a symmetrical gigabit connection (1gbit down / 1gbit up)? You
> can then set the threads to 100, if the file is large enough (at least
> 10GB) it should saturate your upload. This also depends on your CPU and
> RAM. The more threads, the more CPU/RAM will be used.
> If the initial backup is done, Backblaze scans your drives for new files
> and puts it in the upload queue (small files first).
> So If you have many small files to back up, the upload will be very slow.
>
> So - "what changes and how to fix" is hard to answer.
> Is your initial backup already done?
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#127 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJGHKXNWBJVAKHKZPID333YUS2NRAVCNFSM6AAAAABDPYME5GVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSNJUGM4TEMZUGE>
> .
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
> <JonathanTreffler/backblaze-personal-wine-container/issues/127/1954392341
> @github.com>
>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks for the follow-up. Please do some more testing and let us know what you find. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
docker run --rm --net=host tianon/speedtest --accept-license |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Also seeing extremely similar behaviour on my container on unraid with :latest. Seeing normal speed on my desktop backup, on the same network. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I have noticed the same behaviours recently (also unraid) since the last week/week and half too. Went from around 600GB/day to 50GB/day max if that.. Network on my side is fine too. Also seeing a lot lower system usage vs before this where it would better use a lot more resources |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hey, |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Happy to share that, but where do I access the info? Clicking the ? in the top right of the app UI doesn't do anything. Is there a command I can send the docker to generate version number? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
If you are using the latest version of our docker container you should see a windows-like environment with a task bar. when you click in the bottom right corner of the task bar, the Backblaze menu opens - click "About..." - there you can find the version |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
9.0.1.763 (20240119234549) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Great, then this is our current known-good release. Hopefully next week I'll have the time to push out a new release of this container and then your Backblaze client should update automatically to 9.0.1.767 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
If I force latest update and have issues, is it possible to roll back? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Yes, but that is a manual task (download the pinned bz version you find in our repository, and then executing the install commands manually which you can find in the startapp.sh script). |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'm on 767 now. Not seeing any improvement |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Would installing with 1.7.1 first, and then changing docker to pull latest
be an effective workaround, for now?
…On Sat, Feb 24, 2024 at 1:24 PM B Ivanov ***@***.***> wrote:
I went to try this and blew away the container and appdata, but then ran
into a broken install. Trying with older tags like 1.7.1 still results in
slow uploads.
The maintainers are aware that new installs are broken #131
<#131>
Bigger picture I'm curious what the recent changes to latest might have
done to fix the upload speed issue?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#130 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJGHKQBMGD7NFZSZ2X2Z5DYVIV6BAVCNFSM6AAAAABDV64BCSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43SRDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHM4DKNZYG4YTK>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
<JonathanTreffler/backblaze-personal-wine-container/repo-discussions/130/comments/8578715
@github.com>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I tried using 1.7.1 twice today and it didn't look like it. I'm currently back on it running my previous config just so I have some sort of offsite solution running. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'm saying start with 1.7.1 to get the application installed, but then overwrite the docker with latest. wouldn't that fix the environmental issue or whatever it is with 1.7.1, but workaround the install error on latest? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I see what you mean now. I'll give that a shot now. At least it confirms if whatever causes the slowdowns manifests during install time. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Just tried that.
Getting virtually no movement, about 125 KB/s. I think I'm going to park it here for the day. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Oh no! I’m seeing the opposite
…On Sat, Feb 24, 2024 at 2:47 PM B Ivanov ***@***.***> wrote:
Just tried that.
1. Delete the container
2. Delete the backblaze folder in appdata
3. Install using 1.7.1 and inherit the backup.
4. Switch to latest.
Getting virtually no movement, about 125 KB/s.
I think I'm going to park it here for the day.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#130 (reply in thread)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJGHKWULKHVRIK63QKMGLDYVI7VNAVCNFSM6AAAAABDV64BCSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43SRDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHM4DKNZZGE4DC>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
<JonathanTreffler/backblaze-personal-wine-container/repo-discussions/130/comments/8579181
@github.com>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Looks like I'm back to 1.5 MB/s. I'm going to let this run and see what happens when the next batch of images are pushed. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Might be worth trying again. I gutted everything. Then I installed the v1.7.1 docker to get the application installed properly. Then after Backblaze had loaded properly and completed setup, I edited the docker to target latest. After doing that, everything worked. I was seeing upload speeds between 1-300mbps targeting US East which is the closest data center they have to me |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I will try again when a new |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
so yesterday I finally got my internet upgraded from 20mbps upload to 1gbps and after setting backblaze to no longer ignore the several TB worth of acronis images that I have on my unraid server that just wasn't worth even trying to upload at 20mbps as it would never get anywhere I was more than a little disappointed to only get 15-20 mbps upload. It didn't seem to matter how many threads were set to it was basically no faster. I tried forcing the latest version of backblaze but it made no difference so I tried deleting the whole appdata folder and reinstalling and inheriting the backup. If you get the black screen during install you can run
from the unraid console and navigate to the install_backblaze.exe in c:\ and run it to work around it. When it finally finished inheriting the backup I was getting 70-80mbps which was an improvement but still not great. tried turning off all VM`s and Docker containers running on unraid and it made no change and the CPU was barely being used despite the files being uploaded being 10s or 100s of GB in size. In desperation I once again deleted the appdata folder and starter to reinstall however this time when it got the the black screen I swapped the 9.0.1.767 install_backblaze.exe with 8.5.0.685 that was backed up to backblaze when I first set the container up last summer and as soon as it finished inheriting I was getting 700-800 mbps with the 3 cores that I pinned to the backblaze container spiking to 100%. so it looks like the wine environment is not the issue and it has something to do with the more recent backblaze clients and possibly it running on unraid. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I appreciate your reply on the Unraid forums to get me over here; I've tried doing what you said you did (installing BB v8.x in the v1.7.1 docker), I've tried rolling back to v1.5 (where the BB install should have still been v8.x), I've tried taking the latest tag off and setting it to v1.7 and v1.7.1, and, so far, I'm having absolutely no success. During all of this, I've deleted the docker image with the docker uninstalls and deleted the Backblaze_Personal_Backup appdata folder each time, I've tried pinning cores, I've tried setting the docker to privileged, all to no avail. In fact, I'm worse off now, because now I can't even get past the initial drive analysis during install, it just hangs right at the end, no matter which version of BB I'm trying to install, even though I can see all of /mnt/user in the D drive in Wine Explorer:
Last time I just sat and left it alone, BB and/or Wine eventually crashed and became unresponsive, so I basically had to start all over again. It has been a multi-hour exercise in futility today... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
it took about 3 hours analyzing drive each time on my array and it would sit like that and look like its not doing anything each time for me too which is extremely frustrating to have to wait 6+ hours to see if what you tried had any effect as it would analyze drive after inheriting the previous backup as well. if you browse to /mnt/user/appdata/Backblaze_Personal_Backup/wine/drive_c/ProgramData/Backblaze/bzdata/bzlogs/bzfilelist/ you should be able to tail the bzfilelist{date}.log you could also tail {random}_d____filelist.dat in /mnt/user/appdata/Backblaze_Personal_Backup/wine/drive_c/ProgramData/Backblaze/bzdata/bzfilelists/ to get an idea of where it is, just be extremely careful in that folder as I imagine backblaze would not like if you edited any of those files, the process seems to really choke hard on folders with a lot of small files but it still runs. for me it was the tdarr appdata folder as it has over 1milion tiny files which would take 2 hours to scan on its own and it would look like its not doing anything for 30mins at a time in the log file then the filelist.dat would jump 20mb in size as it finished scanning a whole lot of files. when its finished if you tail the {date}.log in /mnt/user/appdata/Backblaze_Personal_Backup/wine/drive_c/ProgramData/Backblaze/bzdata/bzlogs/bzreports_lastfilestransmitted/ you should be able to see fairly quickly if you are getting decent speeds, for me each thread was maxing out at about 700kBits/sec but is flying along for me now on v8.5 2024-02-27 06:20:25 - large - throttle autotest 11 - 4605 kBits/sec - 10485760 bytes - Chunk 00000 of D: one last thing, make sure you add DISABLE_AUTOUPDATE true as an environmental variable in the docker template otherwise it will update to v9 next time the docker is started. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
so I have done a bit more messing about and it appears that the last version of backblaze that would upload at full speed for me was 9.0.0.749 I installed the latest beta 9.0.1.769 and the file that it was part way through uploading ground to a halt. 2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7301 kBits/sec - 10485760 bytes - Chunk 00000 of D: I then reinstalled 9.0.0.749 over the top and it went back to full speed so it looks like you don't need to delete the appdata folder at all, just downgrade to an older version of backblaze. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Can confirm, 9.0.0.749 made a HUUGGGEEE difference. Without diving into the logs, my Unraid dashboard was showing about 12 Mbps (other services running as well, so I'm sure it wasn't the full 12). After downgrading to this version, I'm seeing around 40 Mbps. That's pretty close to my ISP rating.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
At this point, I installed 9.0.0.749 in the v1.7.1 docker about 5.5 hours ago and it's still "hung" on "Analyzing Drive"; granted, my array is 112 TB (75 TB used), so I get that it'd take a while before I'd get to a spot to exclude /mnt/user directories in the BB GUI, but even when I initially had fewer drives/less drive space and had set an older version of this docker up, it didn't take anywhere close to as long as it's taken so far. Nonetheless, the warnings and errors I've seen in the bzfilelist logs are progressing through, right now, my /appdata folder and Wine/BB hasn't crashed yet (RAM usage has steadily increased to about a shade over 3 GB right now, but there's plenty available), so there's that. Edit at 2109 CST: FINALLY, IT FINISHED SCANNING!!! Edit at 2210 CST: After inheriting my machine state back and BB rescanning for differences, it's apparently working A-OK now on 9.0.0.749/v1.7.1; with "Faster Backups"/15 threads set, it's hitting my 4 pinned cores/threads hard and the upload speed is much improved and more in line with what it should be. As 10Thirty said above, don't forget to edit the docker and create the 'DISABLE_AUTOUPDATE' variable and set it to 'true', so the docker doesn't download and install the latest BB version if the docker is restarted or updated.
To 10Thirty: chef's kiss You came in clutch... I would have still been pulling my hair out and getting nowhere on this if not for you. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Can you explain how to downgrade the Backblaze version? I’ve tried with no
luck
…On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 3:44 PM 10Thirty ***@***.***> wrote:
so I have done a bit more messing about and it appears that the last
version of backblaze that would upload at full speed for me was 9.0.0.749
I installed the latest beta 9.0.1.769 and the file that it was part way
through uploading ground to a halt.
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7301 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00000 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7400 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00001 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7515 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00002 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7636 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00003 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7787 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00004 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7933 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00005 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 8094 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00006 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 8248 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00007 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 8434 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00008 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 8706 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00009 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 8931 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0000a of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 9156 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0000b of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 9378 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0000c of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 9623 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0000d of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 9892 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0000e of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 10152 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0000f of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 10473 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00010 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 10759 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00011 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 11130 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00012 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 11659 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00013 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 12073 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00014 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 12592 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00015 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 13202 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00016 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 13795 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00017 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 14441 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00018 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 15178 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00019 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:14 - large - throttle manual 11 - 15933 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0001a of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:22 - large - throttle manual 11 - 11139 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00029 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:22 - large - throttle manual 11 - 11476 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0002a of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:22 - large - throttle manual 11 - 11833 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0002b of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:22 - large - throttle manual 11 - 12186 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0002c of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:22 - large - throttle manual 11 - 12590 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0002d of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:22 - large - throttle manual 11 - 13048 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0002e of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:22 - large - throttle manual 11 - 13754 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0002f of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:22 - large - throttle manual 11 - 14576 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00030 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 15244 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00031 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 15942 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00032 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 16677 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00033 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 10344 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00028 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 6388 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0001b of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 6594 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0001c of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 6753 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0001d of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 6908 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0001e of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7087 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0001f of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7233 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00020 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7391 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00021 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7571 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00022 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7749 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00023 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 7925 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00024 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 8171 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00025 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 8456 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00026 of D:
2024-02-27 20:01:23 - large - throttle manual 11 - 8678 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00027 of D:
2024-02-27 20:04:55 - large - throttle manual 11 - 925 kBits/sec - 8414359
bytes - Chunk 00048 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:32 - large - throttle manual 11 - 737 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00034 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:33 - large - throttle manual 11 - 734 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00035 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:33 - large - throttle manual 11 - 734 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00036 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:33 - large - throttle manual 11 - 740 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0003b of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:33 - large - throttle manual 11 - 734 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00037 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:33 - large - throttle manual 11 - 734 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00039 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:33 - large - throttle manual 11 - 735 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0003a of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:34 - large - throttle manual 11 - 739 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0003e of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:34 - large - throttle manual 11 - 729 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00038 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:34 - large - throttle manual 11 - 733 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0003c of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:34 - large - throttle manual 11 - 735 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0003d of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:34 - large - throttle manual 11 - 740 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00042 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:34 - large - throttle manual 11 - 737 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00041 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:35 - large - throttle manual 11 - 743 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00047 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:35 - large - throttle manual 11 - 730 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 0003f of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:35 - large - throttle manual 11 - 731 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00040 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:35 - large - throttle manual 11 - 735 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00043 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:36 - large - throttle manual 11 - 735 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00046 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:37 - large - throttle manual 11 - 727 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00044 of D:
2024-02-27 20:05:38 - large - throttle manual 11 - 718 kBits/sec -
10485760 bytes - Chunk 00045 of D:
I then reinstalled 9.0.0.749 over the top and it went back to full speed
so it looks like you don't need to delete the appdata folder at all, just
downgrade to an older version of backblaze.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#130 (reply in thread)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJGHKS5JWNYA5IGEIUBEWLYVZAS5AVCNFSM6AAAAABDV64BCSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43SRDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHM4DMMJQGQ3DM>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
<JonathanTreffler/backblaze-personal-wine-container/repo-discussions/130/comments/8610466
@github.com>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I just copied the install_backblaze.exe to /mnt/user/appdata/Backblaze_Personal_Backup/wine/drive_c/ then ran
from the unraid console and just browsed to the exe in wine and double clicked it. you will see bzextract or something like that come up on the wine task bar, just right click on that after a few seconds and close it and the installer should pop up and then just click install now
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thank you! That seems to have improved things even further
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Are fluctuating speeds like this normal? I would assume so, since it's processing 10MB chunks, but just wanted to check. I've never monitored in real time, prior to this thread |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
my network graph looks much the same. it looks like it splits the whole file its going to upload into 10mb chunks then checks if its already been uploaded then starts uploading so that's why the speed drops to 0 for 10 seconds or so as its preparing the next file for upload so makes sense why it looks like that to me. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Did you just have to downgrade backblaze or did you also use a different version tag? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks so much. I’ll test this as soon as I get home tonight
…On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 6:41 PM BrttClne22 ***@***.***> wrote:
Can confirm, 9.0.0.749 made a HUUGGGEEE difference.
Without diving into the logs, my Unraid dashboard was showing about 12
Mbps (other services running as well, so I'm sure it wasn't the full 12).
After downgrading to this version, I'm seeing around 40 Mbps. That's pretty
close to my ISP rating.
image.png (view on web)
<https://github.com/JonathanTreffler/backblaze-personal-wine-container/assets/16241652/d10c6a08-ff7f-4973-8ec7-2286c23453a5>
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#130 (reply in thread)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJGHKWS765I3DITEQHB6ODYVZVJ3AVCNFSM6AAAAABDV64BCSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43SRDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHM4DMMJRGYZTA>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
<JonathanTreffler/backblaze-personal-wine-container/repo-discussions/130/comments/8611630
@github.com>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
This is what I was referring to in some GitHub issues:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I totally agree, however the speed issue with 9.0.1.769, 9.0.1.767 and 9.0.1.763 effectively renders backblaze useless for those experiencing it. it's all well and good saying wait for a bugfix from backblaze but we don't know how long, if at all till it is fixed. hell backblaze may have introduced it deliberately to stop people running backblaze on unsupported operating systems. I would much rather take the risk rolling back to an older version that will take hours to complete a backup that can then be tested to see if it can restore, than run a version that will literally never complete a full backup as data is being added/modified faster than it can upload. Everyone should be doing regular restore-tests on the data stored by backblaze whether you are running the "known-good" or not. you don't want to find out your backup hasn't been working when you actually need it. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
The decision rests with each individual as to whether they choose to downgrade or not.
It could also be a compatibility issue with Unraid. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I've been following this thread with the same issues. How can I get a copy of the v9.0.1.769 version? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
How do I know what version of Backblaze I have running? I tried running the installer with -version option in wine but it just throws errors... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Click on the bottom right corner of the UI. Then about
…On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 9:42 PM Gregory D. Estes ***@***.***> wrote:
How do I know what version of Backblaze I have running?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#130 (reply in thread)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJGHKWNTPONYO3XQUMKDITYYTYHTAVCNFSM6AAAAABDV64BCSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43SRDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHM4DQMJVGU3DQ>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
<JonathanTreffler/backblaze-personal-wine-container/repo-discussions/130/comments/8815568
@github.com>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Does anyone know the date, or the URL, for the version of BB that works? 9.0.0.749 I believe? I went to archive.org but not sure what date to roll back to. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
EDIT: it didn't work for me. still capped @ 6mbps. Your post helped me thanks @Gex2501 December 13th is the one. I had to go to add and remove programs, uninstall the old version, restart the docker and then copy the install from my pc to the share, then open run and type / and then enter and it will open the file window. browse to the file and run it and then your good to go. Make sure your docker setting FORCE_LATEST_UPDATE is set to false and Disable Updates is set to true. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
9.0.0.749 is the one released Jan 20, 2024. Direct wayback link: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Any update on a fix for this issue ? This only happen with the container and not the official backblaze app on windows |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
EDIT: Alright after learning some more and doing a lot more reading I think I got my Unraid install downgraded properly. Had a few different steps than others but ended on the same container v1.7.1 and backblaze version 9.0.0.749. Started with a fresh appdata, probably not necessary though. Moved the 9,0,0,749 install_backblaze.exe into the drive_c folder. In the wine explorer, uninstalled the current version of backblaze, restarted the container, closed out of the install since it is not the version we want. For me, my permissions were set and I needed to run as root so from unraid terminal, My file missing error was caused by user the app permissions in docker exec, had to use root or no --user tag to get it to function right for my permissions/system. ---Original comment--- I have tried to downgrade but when I uninstall backblaze and then run the installer I get an error that the bzui.exe was not transferred to the disk. I was getting like 600kb/s and unable to keep up/catch up my backups. Considering just running a windows VM with a mapped share drive in Unraid. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I did uninstall, there is no auto update setting in backblaze itself but their documentation does say that "periodically the client will update itself" and maybe that is what I am running into? Not sure why I am but no one else is? I went through the folders and found an auto downloaded installer for a newer version and deleted it. Also removed the original installer I used because it links to it in the file structure and im not sure if it might have something to do with it. Hopefully it does not update. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
It is definitely an auto update feature of the client itself. Downgrade lasted a few hours this time and then it updated to the latest. Not sure how to disable it yet. EDIT: I believe bzdoinstall.exe is responsible for the silent auto updates. As a test I renamed the file so it will not run. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I am also experiencing the auto updating, regardless of the container setting. They seem to have worked around whatever locking mechanism is currently implemented. However, I have found I am able to retain the performance of the .749 version with .767! Previous versions/container configurations essentially had no performance change, regardless of the settings on the Performance tab. Now, it seems they actually impact the upload performance. Setting the Manual Throttle all the way right (Faster Backups), and Maximum Number of Backup Threads to 100 is what I'm using and I may tune these later, but I'm just happy to have performance parity. Another factor that has been pointed out is these performance issues seem to be only for unraid users (as I am as well). I did the recent .9 and .10 updates, so maybe one of these impacts how the container functions. Just a thought in case someone tries my settings and doesn't see the performance improve, it may be worth checking unraid version. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Interesting. I am updating from .8 currently to test. Are your upload speeds normal now? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I would say they are as good as .749, when I make the Performance tab adjustments. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
What speeds are you seeing?
…On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 5:54 PM daveerickson ***@***.***> wrote:
I am also experiencing the auto updating, regardless of the container
setting. They seem to have worked around whatever locking mechanism is
currently implemented.
However, I have found I am able to retain the performance of the .749
version with .767! Previous versions/container configurations essentially
had no performance change, regardless of the settings on the Performance
tab. Now, it seems they actually impact the upload performance. Setting the
Manual Throttle all the way right (Faster Backups), and Maximum Number of
Backup Threads to 100 is what I'm using and I may tune these later, but I'm
just happy to have performance parity.
Another factor that has been pointed out is these performance issues seem
to be only for unraid users (as I am as well). I did the recent .9 and .10
updates, so maybe one of these impacts how the container functions. Just a
thought in case someone tries my settings and doesn't see the performance
improve, it may be worth checking unraid version.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#130 (reply in thread)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJGHKTEAPZU5DCWNN33T73Y3XD3FAVCNFSM6AAAAABDV64BCSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43SRDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHM4TAMJUHA4TQ>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
<JonathanTreffler/backblaze-personal-wine-container/repo-discussions/130/comments/9014898
@github.com>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I can max out upload on my gig connection. It's not constant, it fluctuates up and down some, but I used to only get about 20 mbit/s. The other telltale sign to me is the CPU usage is back up, like I see with .749, when I make the Performance tab adjustments. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Correct.
After almost a month since I got the .749 BB installed and disabled BB auto-updates on the then-latest docker image, things were running fine until a couple of days ago, when the upload speeds backslid to what I was getting before the fix. Indeed, BB's own auto-update routines totally disregards the docker settings and updates anyway, so I had to blow out the BB install in Wine (just the standard Windows add/remove programs routine inside Wine), restarted the docker, and ran this in the Unraid console to get the Wine desktop/Wine explorer open once I had the docker back up:
Once I got that all back up, I ran the .749 BB installer I had saved from February; the first time, something screwed up to where BB errored out on the initial disk scan, so I uninstalled it and reinstalled it again (and added a .bak file extension on the bzdoinstall.exe file, so BB can't find and run it). This time, the initial disk scan is taking forever, just like it was back in February, so it looks to be going down the right track; I'll have to perhaps wait a few hours for that to complete and go from there. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
You don't actually need to uninstall the latest version to downgrade, just run the .749 install over the top and it will keep all your settings so no need to rescan. There is however a data corruption bug in .749 and earlier which is why backblaze is pushing out the current version. If you notice that backblaze is uploading the same files every 3 days then you will have files that are incomplete on backblaze`s servers and will require the current version to complete. For me I had about 800GB of files that were retrying with version .749. That unraid server is back on a 20mbps connection and running .767 which it is maxing out when needed, so no idea if the current version with the latest unraid version still has speed issues. see https://old.reddit.com/r/backblaze/comments/18e1cgm/is_your_backup_corrupt_please_check/ for more details about the bug. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I changed my bzdoinstall to bzdoinstall.exe.bak and the client still updated itself. Bright side is that my upload speeds are significantly better than they were before. Ill post more info in the reply below this |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
What container version are you running?On Apr 5, 2024, at 07:36, daveerickson ***@***.***> wrote:
I can max out upload on my gig connection. It's not constant, it fluctuates up and down some, but I used to only get about 20 mbit/s. The other telltale sign to me is the CPU usage is back up, like I see with .749, when I make the Performance tab adjustments.
—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Was able to quickly go to the :latest tag and upload speeds are dramatically lower. Somewhere in the 40Kbps. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Alright, got off the :latest tag and moved to ubuntu22 and speeds are back up in the 8-15Mbps range. I have 100 up so that aint bad. That is latest client version and ubuntu22 tag and fully updated Unraid. Seems the client update might have fixed some of the slow speed issues but it looks like the older version might have still been a bit faster? Hard to tell right now without trending for longer. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I am on the latest version aswell running :ubuntu22 tag and full updated unraid and my speeds have increased from a constant 6mbps to now 10mbps. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Something seems to have happened since yesterday/this morning. I'm back down to 600kbps. Downgraded client back to 9.0.0.749 and maintained the ubuntu22 tag. Uploads are back up in the 15mbps range. Renamed bzdoinstall.exe to bzdoinstall.bak again to hopefully prevent the auto update but that did not seem to work last time. As extra precaution this time I changed the permissions of bzdoinstall.bak to 444 as well as the bzupdates folder. Hopefully wont cause any other issues besides preventing the auto updater. Even with all of that, it managed to update itself. Back to 600kbps... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Ok, I'm an Unraid/docker noob. Can I assume that, in order to switch to ubuntu22 tag I need to run "docker pull tessypowder/backblaze-personal-wine:ubuntu22" command only after wiping/deleting my current container? Do I need to write down and re-create all of the container settings? I've backed up the appdata folder. Do I copy that, or some files, back once installed? - if not, why are you guys backing this up? I'm pretty good with Google, but this "seemingly" typical procedure isn't written about much. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
You can just switch to the ubuntu22 tag. Unraid makes it pretty simple, go to your container settings, advanced view and at the end of the repo add :ubuntu22. Save and it will reload with ubuntu22. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Ah ok! Got it switching, thanks! Unfortunately I've noticed zero speed difference between ubuntu22 and latest - on latest Backblaze version anyway. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hi there, so finally, what is the definitive fix for that problem please ? I think i tried every solution proposed on this page (downgrade Backblaze version, rename Updater, changing container branch, etc), but still no luck :/ I'm actually on tag Ubuntu22, this morning was my 5 or 6 updates of this branch. I'm now at almost 14Tb not backed up and growing cause less than 1MB/s of upload :/ Thank you very much ! :) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
It's been working fine for me with the Ubuntu 22 version. They have documentation now to prevent the auto updates if older versions work. I would also recommend not using this method if you have that much data to backup as you are taking advantage of the company and their personal plan is not meant for that much data. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I read through this thread a few times and tried many suggestions but didn't succeed in getting a higher upload speed than apx 0,7Mb/s with the default settings. I also tried tags like ubuntu22, installed the older (9.0.0.749) version and manually set the number of threads. The tags didn't have an effect in my situation, the older version of the BB app reported a higher speed but got overwritten by the newer version whatever I set in docker settings and locking folders/renaming files. Also more threads didn't lead to a higher speed only to a higher expected upload amount per day. But when I was watching the actual upload feedback in the app. I got the impression that it's uploading much faster than the reported speed (see GIF). I'm sure many of you really have a slow speed, but it got me wondering if the latest BB control panel might have a bug that doesn't calculate the speed properly. And that some of us are just trying to solve a problem that isn't the real problem?
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I am not using the app information to determine speed. I'm tracking transfer from the container via my Grafana setup. The latest tag just doesn't seem to work on Unraid with Ubuntu20 and the older client version of backblaze will increase my speeds but I cannot seem to get the auto update in backblaze to stop. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks for the feedback. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I think it depends on the system you are running it on. The control panel speed seems to be pretty inaccurate no matter what since in general it's uploading small chunk files and only gives speed based on last file transfer. I can't use the latest tag so I have no feedback for that. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'm also using grafana for speed comparisons. My BB control panel speeds are also way off as you said. I was originally on latest tag, getting about 6 Mbps. Rolled back to the older version that maxed out my 40 Mbps uplink. It then auto updated to a newer BB version where I got slow speeds again. Now I'm on Ubuntu22 tag, latest "supported" BB version and I can max out my connection again. One other thing I've noticed, it's been noted by others as well, is that smaller files will inherently have a slower upload speed. So if you're on your initial backup, it will upload smaller files first and gradually get faster when it gets to larger files. TIL responding to a thread via email doesn't attach your comment to the right thread. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks, @BrttClne22 for the suggestion about ubuntu22. I changed the tag and it now even seems to go even a bit more fast. What is your latest version of BB if I may ask? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Thank you very much for the information.
It seems that there is definitely an issue with the Ubuntu 18 image, and I have been able to reproduce it. We will mark Ubuntu 18 as "unmaintained" since that tag will be removed in the future.
Additionally, ubuntu18 has already reached its end-of-life for mainstream support in April 2023.
Also, we are using WINE v9 for ubuntu20 and ubuntu22, while ubuntu18 will be stuck with WINE v8.