@tsukraw I think the bottleneck is indeed the tapdisk and smapiv1. We have full 10Gb WDM between nominal and DR site, and get the same transfer speeds as you on CR. [image: 1779779566351-c860aa15-c649-4608-91f9-0cec88645218-image.jpeg]

When speaking to our Veeam sources, we were told end of July is the target date for 13.1. That is what we are hoping for as Veeam is an important one for us.

@Rod-G These have 9.4.2-xxxx and I need to go through and update everything now that I see how far behind I am. the second VM completed fine after its reboot, something was just stuck in a dirty state and got in the way of the import or health check.

@tonyp90 great, thanks !

@pierrebrunet sorry for the delay in responding... I scored some time out of the office. Before replying, I rebuilt the XO server using the latest version and created a new backup identical to the last. Just wanted to be sure this issue wasn't fixed... I've attached the log. 2026-05-20T21_41_04.958Z - backup NG.json.txt

@julienXOvates PR is here https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/pull/9868 fbeauchamp opened this pull request in vatesfr/xen-orchestra closed fix(xo-web): ignore the number of snapshot of replicated VM in the health dashboard #9868

@Danp fully patched 8.3 (through the most recent May patches). XO commit d810e (master commit e3a58). I usually update XO around the first of each month; so it's a little bit behind master. There are crash logs in /var/crash. I can provide a log bundle if needed, or copy/paste some info here if I know what to provide.

the last rewrite of the stream processing ( spring 2025 ) focused on stability and memory footprint, and , on a standard cpu, it tops at around 300MB/s per backup job. Your benchmarks are very interesting, and they confirm most of it. this limit was not really an issue since, in most case the xapi was limiting around 100MB/s per disk , but it will be more a more visible limit Note that master have some fixes on the memory usage (not related to backups) That's why we have started an internal workforce focused on performance, with all the teams from the kernel to the backups, including storage, network and xapi. If I can brag a little : [image: 1779106650898-afd7b59b-a4f0-4a92-88ee-2c7ba52d18bf-image.jpeg] i9 , nvme disk , backup to a nvme disk in passthrough, xoa and vm are on the same host, so it's quite far from real world data, but it shows where the limit is

@JL457 Hi, For now it looks like Wasabi is not sending us the correct date format, which is strange because we support this provider and don't usually have issues. In order to allow us to investigate further, could you send us the full backup job logs ? You can find them by clicking on the failed backup status and then on the download logs button: [image: 1779106635704-export-logs.png] Relevant XO logs would also help. If you are a client, also don't hesitate to open a ticket with an open support tunnel. Thanks.

@pierrebrunet @poddingue the size is really 2.17Tb, but showing last incremental size on the key I'll wait for the patch, this is really a visual bug, backup is working okay.

I solved the problem by installing and setting up a new Ubuntu Server. I exported the XO configuration from the old server and imported it onto the new one. What can I say—the backup started working again right away.

@McHenry I think depends if the copy is a fast clone, depending of full chain length with 13 points behind, or a full copy of its own that will be independant

@poddingue I see backups in the tasks view fine, just not mirror ones. I'm talking about v5, haven't converted to v6 yet because of missing features.

Thanks, Florent, for the explanation.

So the scheduled backup at 1pm this afternoon ran with no issue. As stated previously the Coalesces are adding now now show 2 for vm. edit - Apr 21 11:22:55 xo-ce xo-server[15617]: }, Apr 21 11:22:55 xo-ce xo-server[15617]: summary: { duration: '6m', cpuUsage: '4%', memoryUsage: '29.01 MiB' } Apr 21 11:22:55 xo-ce xo-server[15617]: } Apr 21 13:00:00 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: 2026-04-21T17:00:00.320Z xo:backups:worker INFO starting backup Apr 21 13:00:00 xo-ce sudo[16938]: xo-service : PWD=/opt/xen-orchestra/packages/xo-server ; USER=root ; COMMAND=/usr/bin/mount -o -t nf> Apr 21 13:00:00 xo-ce sudo[16938]: pam_unix(sudo:session): session opened for user root(uid=0) by (uid=996) Apr 21 13:00:00 xo-ce sudo[16938]: pam_unix(sudo:session): session closed for user root Apr 21 13:00:06 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: 2026-04-21T17:00:06.941Z xo:backups:MixinBackupWriter INFO deleting unused VHD { Apr 21 13:00:06 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: path: '/xo-vm-backups/138538a8-ef52-4d0a-4433-5ebb31d7e152/vdis/9f7daac4-80a1-41f9-8af0-99b6fe> Apr 21 13:00:06 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: } Apr 21 13:00:19 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: 2026-04-21T17:00:19.536Z xo:backups:MixinBackupWriter INFO deleting unused VHD { Apr 21 13:00:19 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: path: '/xo-vm-backups/6d733582-0728-b67c-084b-56abe6047bfc/vdis/9f7daac4-80a1-41f9-8af0-99b6fe> Apr 21 13:00:19 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: } Apr 21 13:01:23 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: 2026-04-21T17:01:23.971Z xo:backups:worker INFO backup has ended Apr 21 13:01:23 xo-ce sudo[16971]: xo-service : PWD=/opt/xen-orchestra/packages/xo-server ; USER=root ; COMMAND=/usr/bin/umount /run/xo-> Apr 21 13:01:23 xo-ce sudo[16971]: pam_unix(sudo:session): session opened for user root(uid=0) by (uid=996) Apr 21 13:01:23 xo-ce sudo[16971]: pam_unix(sudo:session): session closed for user root Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: 2026-04-21T17:01:24.029Z xo:backups:worker INFO process will exit { Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: duration: 83708608, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: exitCode: 0, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: resourceUsage: { Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: userCPUTime: 31147905, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: systemCPUTime: 14319055, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: maxRSS: 65888, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: sharedMemorySize: 0, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: unsharedDataSize: 0, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: unsharedStackSize: 0, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: minorPageFault: 367979, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: majorPageFault: 1, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: swappedOut: 0, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: fsRead: 5648, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: fsWrite: 16101272, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: ipcSent: 0, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: ipcReceived: 0, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: signalsCount: 0, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: voluntaryContextSwitches: 65983, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: involuntaryContextSwitches: 7745 Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: }, Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: summary: { duration: '1m', cpuUsage: '54%', memoryUsage: '64.34 MiB' } Apr 21 13:01:24 xo-ce xo-server[16924]: } lines 617-656/656 (END)

Hello @MathieuRA , @florent Moving the discussion to this thread as it seems to be tackling the same issue: https://xcp-ng.org/forum/topic/11892/xoa-memory-usage/28?_=1776334896974 I reported my findings so far over there Best regards

@Pilow Thanks for the heads-up, you should be able to add back concurrency as it was before and get similar performance to before the refactoring.

Thank you for your feedback @kratos !