Hi,
Andrew Paterson wrote:
Arno,
Thank you very much for all that.
You've given me enough fodder to keep me quiet (& off the list) for some
time.
In fact I didn't intend to keep you off the list.
I shall download & read up...... I shall also seriously consider a parallel installation - excellent idea.
Regarding webacula, I like it because its my "window for the suits" into the State of the network backups & we all know how "suits" love pictures! It also enables me to pass day-today monitoring to persons who might be "a little dangerous if left to their own devices with a writeable access method!".
Regarding "why upgrade", well.. being a long-standing linux fan, I have been bitten so many times by the fact of life of open-source in that it's a moving target! If I don't upgrade (note you inferred that there is still a documented procedure from my current version to the latest) I fear I will be caught out with no upgrade path other than to blow away all my current backups. This is not a complaint - far from it - it's just that bacula is dealing with historic data (possibly up to years old!) & that naturally clashes with it's open-source dynamic development status - just like linux generally in fact. Hence my desire to upgrade.
From my experience, I'd say that bacula is very stable in its data format - this is one of Kerns main development goals.
Even the protocols betwenn DIR, SD and FD are quite stable, altough with the upcoming version (and the develeopment tree) there are incompatibilies. I've got no problems running different 1.36 versions together. Actually, I even believe I've still got 1.34.6 FDs running, although I don't want to look now - still, this tells somethings about careful development. Commercial products can't compete here, but they have to sell as many upgrades as possible :-)
Thanks for the reply
Good luck upgrading - should be easy enough.
Arno
Andrew Paterson
-----Original Message-----
From: Arno Lehmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 May 2005 21:08
To: Andrew Paterson
Cc: Bacula-Users (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Upgrading live system from Bacula 1.34.6 to
current stable release
Hello,
Andrew Paterson wrote:
Hi, I have been running Bacula 1.34.6 on WIN-XP, Solaris
2.6/7/8/9/10 (client only on XP & 2.6) for approximately a year now.
What can I say ... I'm very fond of it :)
Quite understandable.
However, I have a feeling I should upgrade to a newer version now -
why? -
(ummm! just a feeling in the ol' bones y'know!) primarily to catch up
with bug-fixes/improvements.
Considering the recent changes, that's not a bad idea, although, if your
installation works... well, it's your decision.
I currently use mysql V4.0.21 for the catalogue.
What I am concerned about is that if I upgrade, am I going to find my
existing catalogue incompatible with the new version of bacula (i.e. the DB schema may have changed).
Yes.
Therefore, is there an approved procedure for migrating my catalogue
to the latest (stable) version of bacula?
Yes. It's in the installation procedure. All necessary scripts are included, and the manual gives instructions.
Are there any compatibility problems with the data held on my current
backup media and the new version of bacula?
Shouldn't.
In addition, does anyone have any idea if it's worth upgrading to a
newer version of Mysql (although I don't anticipate that
as much of a problem).
I wouldn'tdo that - unless you see real improvements with a new version of mysql. Like if you have performance or stability issues.
Finally is the latest stable version compatible with webacula
(probably a naff question - but I'd like to make sure).
webacula? No idea...
Anyway, you should read the current manual, the release notes back to 1.34.6, and set up a migration installation - after all, you can have different versions of bacula working on one system.
Arno
I am sure others have gone through the upgrade procedure - so please
tell me how you fared.
Didn't notice anything bad. In fact, he last few "migrations" were quite
simple: - unpack current source - call prepared ./configure-wrapper with my local options - patch one line in one file (I always do this manually...) - make - /etc/init.d/bacula stop - mv /etc/sbin/bacula-X /etc/sbin/bacula-1.36.old-version... you get the
point - cp -iv ./src/dird/bacula-dir /sbin/bacula-dir et al. - /etc/rc.d/bacula start
The next day I get the bacup reportsand everything's ok :-) Some days after that, I do a test restore.
Arno
TIA
Andrew R Paterson Systems Engineer DS Ltd
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes Want to be the first software developer in space? Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ids93&alloc_id281&op=click _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
-- IT-Service Lehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Arno Lehmann http://www.its-lehmann.de
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes Want to be the first software developer in space? Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7393&alloc_id=16281&op=click _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
