On Friday 29 July 2005 11:03, Daniel Holtkamp wrote:
> Hello !
>
> Firstoff excuse me for contacting you directly but from reading the
> mailinglist-archives i was getting the impression that this might be the
> easiest way to get the information i am trying to collect :-)
>
> At the moment we are using AMANDA as our backup system but are looking
> for something new because of certain amanda behaviors we don`t like.
>
> Our Backupserver is a nice machine, this is what we can work with:
> 4x 250GB SATA Drives for Storage
> 4x Dell Powervault 110T - LTO1 Ultrium Drives (100GB)
> 2x100MBit network connection (bonding device - this should not interfere
> with bacula i hope)
>
> We are backing up 30 systems with this machine and are approaching a
> total backup volume of 550 GB every night! (Fullbackups only - no
> incremental).
>
> Now i read about your (2 monts old) request for people that would like
> to help testing the multiple-tape-drive feature and i`d like to know if
> you still need help with this.
Yes, any testing of multiple-drive autochanger support would be helpful.
>
> Since our backupserver mainly used during off-hours it`s running idle
> almost all day long so i would have the time to test bacula settings
> during daytime.
>
> My boss wants me to look out for certain features for our new backup
> solution, these would be:
>
> Easy access for recovery of single files/single partitions/complete
> systems - Basically he wants to say "I want that file from that system",
> get a list on how many versions of the file are available, pick one and
> restore it - maybe requiring a tape.
>
> Amanda changes the access-times on all the files it backups but this
> collides with out tmpwatch system - the files never expire :-( I hope
> this behavior is different with bacula.
Bacula uses access times to decide what files to backup on Incremental and
Differential backups. I'm not sure what the tmpwatch system does or why it
conflicts with Amanda.
>
> Better backup of our two windows-servers - currently via SMB which is
> not a good solution (getting frequent errors there).
Bacula has a much better solution (IMO).
>
> We are aiming for the following on-disk-backup strategy:
> 1 Fullbackup Sunday
> Incrementals Monday-Saturday
> repeat
You would probably be better off with a Full backup once a month,
Differentials weekly, and Incrementals other times. There is one chapter of
the manual devoted to this subject.
>
> Would it be possible (and would it make sense ;) ) to mirror this
> behaviour to the tape-drives after the backup-to-disk is done ? So it
> would do the fullbackup on Sunday and after it is finished it will start
> writing the backed-up data to the tape-drives changing drives as the
> tapes get full - and after each incremental backup append those to the
> tape-set for the week ?
I see a lot of possibilities here. Your best bet is to ask the bacula-users
list for help.
> Or would we have to use fresh tapes for each day of incremental backup ?
Bacula can write multiple jobs to a given tape.
>
> If the fullbackup + one week of incrementals fit on 4x100GB Ultrium
> Tapes this would mean changing the tapes once per week.
>
> Should i go and start testing things out with 1.36.3-1, should i take
> the development version or should i wait for 1.38 (from reading the
> lists i got the impression it`s not very far away :) )
I would recommend starting with 1.37.30 for testing, then as soon as 1.38 is
released, upgrade. This will save you a lot of head-ache.
--
Best regards,
Kern
(">
/\
V_V
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
