D Canfield wrote:
Perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but I would have assumed Maildir
to be *less* prone to consistency errors. I may not be able to say
"here's exactly what the server looked like at 11:59 on 5/23" but I
don't see how the backups would be invalid. I could see issues with
mbox storage where you'd start reading a large mailbox, and the server
rewrites half the file before you finish with it. Again, I may be
missing something...
In any case, how would the LVM snap help me with the original problem?
Wouldn't I still need to backup millions of small files even with a
snapshot?
Thanks
DC
Ryan Novosielski wrote:
You'd almost need an LVM snap anyway, wouldn't you, for consistency's
sake? Seems to me Maildir is particularly vulnerable to inconsistency
if backed up while the server is running.
---- _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _
|Y#| | | |\/| | \ |\ | | |Ryan Novosielski - User Support Spec. III
|$&| |__| | | |__/ | \| _| |[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 973/972.0922 (2-0922)
\__/ Univ. of Med. and Dent.|IST/AST - NJMS Medical Science Bldg - C630
On Wed, 24 May 2006, D Canfield wrote:
I'm just curious how other users are backing up maildirs using
bacula. We're using cyrus as our mail server, so we've got about
162GB of data stored in 4.4 million files, or an average of 37K per
message. Most other products I've tried (both commercial and open
source) have not been too happy with this arrangement and end up
requiring vast amounts of disk space and overhead to index this kind
of mail spool.
Does anyone know if bacula is any better with this? If not, I'm
thinking my best resort would be to have each user's mail spool
gzipped before backing it up (we don't restore individual emails for
users, so this kind of "resolution" is sufficient for us). Any ideas
on a good way of doing this that won't require me to run an external
crob job to do the zipping and require almost twice the disk space?
Any other insights would also be appreciated.
Thanks!
DC
Hi -
I think the point that Ryan is trying to convey is that an LVM snapshot
would be much quicker than any other product out there, including
Bacula. You could then archive that snapshot, and be sitting pretty.
I think Ryan suggested against Bacula for those 4.4 million files
because it would take a while, leading to inconsistancies. At least
that's what I think ;)
THanks
-dant
-------------------------------------------------------
All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk!
Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in
the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=107521&bid=248729&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
