Performance improvement with "Optimized For Concurrent LAN Backups" option and data port usage

  • 4 January 2021
  • 6 replies
  • 156 views

Userlevel 3
Badge +4

Optimized For concurrent LAN backups is an option in media agent properties that helps to optimize the Operating System resources on Media Agent machine. It's recommended to enable this where there are multiple clients backing up to media agent.

While enabling "Optimize for..." option is generally recommended, performance wise and when there are firewall rules in place, we need to consider the type of firewall rules in place. Generally speaking adding CVD port number (8400) as additional data port on the Media agent firewall rules is recommended for performance improvements. 

Additional ports are not needed on the client side here. System will only use the CVD port (default 8400) on the MA side as additional port so adding other ports on the MA won't help!

 

Please note with CVD port in additional data ports, Client will transfer the data directly to MA on CVD port bypassing the firewall tunnel and it’s protocol.


6 replies

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

I would add that if you only have a single port, you can now add multi-tunneling (number of tunnels per route), to increase performance.  This is available in network topologies in Command Center and in outgoing routes tab in Java.

 

 

 

Badge +1

Alireza B wrote:
Please note with CVD port in additional data ports, Client will transfer the data directly to MA on CVD port bypassing the firewall tunnel and it’s protocol.


Do note that this ‘protocol’ here will be unecrypted.

While opening port 8400 may/will increase stream performance, for highly secured environments or if encrypted during transit is a requirement this may lead to unwanted situations!

Furthermore with the “Number of tunnels per route” option nowadays the performance gain of opening port 8400 is not that much in my personal experience.

 

As such I nowadays would not recommend adding port 8400 there.

 

my 0.02

Userlevel 6
Badge +13

Alireza B wrote:
Please note with CVD port in additional data ports, Client will transfer the data directly to MA on CVD port bypassing the firewall tunnel and it’s protocol.


Do note that this ‘protocol’ here will be unecrypted.

Agreed and will also bypass throttling if you have set any in place - the feature @MFasulo mentioned is a much better way to improve performance than the CVD port trick, but the old method is still there too with the aforementioned caveats.

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

The method I provided leaves the protocol intact, but improves performance by segmenting control/data traffic, which reduces latency/increases efficiency.   In testing “4” seems to be the magic number

Userlevel 3
Badge +4

Agree on the multi tunneling feature and in our tests we could see the most benefit will be seen in proxy-based scenarios rather than direct connections. In a production environment(Clients->Proxy->MA) increasing the tunnels to 4 increased the performance just more than 3 times! 

Userlevel 2
Badge +6

Alireza B wrote:
Please note with CVD port in additional data ports, Client will transfer the data directly to MA on CVD port bypassing the firewall tunnel and it’s protocol.


Do note that this ‘protocol’ here will be unecrypted.

Agreed and will also bypass throttling if you have set any in place - the feature @MFasulo mentioned is a much better way to improve performance than the CVD port trick, but the old method is still there too with the aforementioned caveats.

 

Just to clarify, I dont believe we can do throttling & Multi-Tunnels at the same time 

Documentation recommends NOT to configure throttling when increasing number of tunnels.

Increasing the Number of Tunnels for a Network Route

 

Reply