Skip to main content

mysql - How to avoid VMware stunning a client during imaging with Veeam

Recently our MySQL server has been "going away" (ie. the client connection drops out). After weeks of trying different things (like adjusting packet size), we've discovered that it's our Veeam imaging backups which use the VMWare API to snapshot and copy the vmdks etc.



We are using ESXi 5 with a Centos 6.4 guest, running (pretty much) only MySQL 5.1.69-log.



The change which seemed to initiate this problem was increasing the physical disk size to 300GB, from about 100, and resizing the guest filesystem to use most of the new capacity. Ever since the disk was increased, we've been getting these problems during backups - presumably due to the increase time it takes to perform snapshot related functions.



The new disks are 2x300GB Gen8 15k SAS in RAID1. The old disks would have been similar only smaller. The target of the Veeam process is a ReadyNAS over a 1Gb dedicated ethernet (i.e. separated from general office traffic).




The host is an HP DL380P tower:



==server spec (BASE CHASSIS)==
SERIES DL380P GEN8
PROCESSOR TYPE Intel Xeon E5-2609 v2 (2.5GHz/4-core/10MB/6.4GT-s QPI/80W)
NUMBER OF PROCESSORS 2
MEMORY 80GB
INTERNAL DRIVE BAYS 8 SFF HDD Bays
COMPATIBLE HDD SFF SAS/SATA

HARD DISK CONTROLLER SMART ARRAY P420I/ZERO MEMORY CONTROLLER (RAID 0/1/1+0)


My "IT guy" has made a few tweaks to the Veeam config including skipping empty blocks (the majority of the new disk is empty), but this didn't seem to help at all.



Veeam haven't been much help either, saying "reboot the target" or "we just use VMWare APIs".



I believe the "stun" means the virtual machine simply freezes for a time (around 30s) then continues normally.



VMWare.log example:




Line 7411: 2016-06-08T17:11:44.910Z| vcpu-0| I120: Checkpoint_Unstun: vm stopped for 21068381 us
Line 7556: 2016-06-08T17:22:24.608Z| vcpu-0| I120: Checkpoint_Unstun: vm stopped for 19819322 us
Line 7700: 2016-06-08T17:22:30.140Z| vcpu-0| I120: Checkpoint_Unstun: vm stopped for 1130044 us
Line 7929: 2016-06-08T17:23:08.616Z| vcpu-0| I120: Checkpoint_Unstun: vm stopped for 30197618 us


So my problem has two likely solutions:





  1. Is there a way to prevent or reduce the "stunning" of a VMWare guest during imaging.


  2. Is there a way to reduce the impact of the stun onto MySQL or the virtual network or Centos.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able