@florent Did you find anything? I just retested the job on latest XO build and have the same error.

I understand your requirements, I'm trying to pinpoint the issue. For now, everything converge on dom0 load when having many zstd processes at once.

@olivierlambert thanks, just to be sure.

@Nephilim Nothing shown here would indicate a problem AFAICS. P.S. Added proper markup to your post

Thanks @olivierlambert!

I don't know if it's still what he does

@McHenry Looks like you want disaster recovery option. It creates a ready-to-use VM on a separate XCP-ng server. If your main server fails you can start the vm directly off the second server. In any case, backups can be restored with XO to any server and storage available in XCP-ng.

Yes.

@Danp I don't really need something complex. I see the full & delta vhd files in each VM's folder but trying to mount the delta vhd with guestmount throws an error. There has to be a way to fold the delta vhds into the main vhd for the most up to date vhd..

@olivierlambert said in XO (from source): backup error (to Wasabi): If you need another trial, no problem. To me, the problem is not in XOA (the broken commit was done after the monthly release) and fixed today, so it means it would be never shipped in XOA. Then I am fine, building XO from Sources provides me with the ability to backup my VMs, which was the only XOA "Feature" I was using... Thanks anyway!!!

@olivierlambert It is now working thanks so much! Also wanted to share I really like XCP-NG!

@olivierlambert @Danp Hi, The backup task is OK and the replication backup is OK. I XCP-ng and XOCE. Thanks

@CJ Currently I do not see any bottleneck with disk and network IOPS as far as XOA and the remote destination are concerned. I'll look into a network share for the VMs if I notice that is becoming a bottleneck.

@Danp yup this was clearly due to lack of my experience reading the logs but after checking the path in the log and seeing I had no permissions I was able to understand it was related to the folder in the NFS share not allowing this host to make changes, strangely enough my other devices worked, but once I set up a new share it resolve the issue. Thanks for your reply.

There's many ways: no backup whatsoever. You will be able to restore your previous backups with a fresh XOA anyway (but you'll have to recreate the backup jobs and local users) metadata backup: very fast to backup and restore on a fresh XOA, probably the easiest way. With XOA, you also have Cloud enabled backup where you metadata will be saved directly on your Vates account (with a password and encrypted) "regular" backup on your XOA (full, incremental, replication…)

Question for @julien-f and/or @florent

A bit after this I started having trouble again. I scrubbed my delta backup sets, switched to using SMB to access the same share and so far I'm a week in with no trouble at all. Remains to be seen if the strange failures will crop up again but so far I think this is the longest I've gone with the delta backups not having some random failure. Usually, it was a backup getting stuck in Started status for a day or two then switching to Interrupted because I'd reboot the XO VM to unstick it, then one of the VM backups will fail because a VDI is attached to DOM0. I know theoretically NFS is better than SMB but for now the one that breaks least often is the better option. Of course, maybe my issue had nothing to do with NFS but for now it's felt like SMB is more reliable.

@olivierlambert nope not at all. i have a feeling that it's not the disks but more like the overhead on cpu of that boxes. V3 is more lightweight.

@cairoti said in Questions about backup features: In Delta Backup and Continuos Replication (CR), if the “Force full backup” option is selected in Schedule, will the results be identical to those of Simple Backup and Disaster Recovery (DR)? In Continuos Replication (CR), although the first backup is full and the rest are incremental backups of the Delta type, why when deleting the first backup can I later restore other backups without problems? No, that's why we are changing the names to avoid confusion. They are very different things, with only 2 families: full vs incremental. Full will always generate XVAs, while incremental work differently. See: [image: Schema-new-wording-backup-2.png] Because we are smart and when you remove it via XO UI, it will automatically regenerate a full from the penultimate backup.

The problem still existed on latest as of earlier today. I removed the VM from the original (Smart Mode) backup job and cleaned up any VDI's and detached backups. As a test I created a separate backup of the VM in question pointing to the same target, this backup was successful. Hopefully I've worked around the issue, I will try adding the VM back into a Smart Mode job in the coming days.