Hi, 21.11.2007 14:07,, Shon Stephens wrote:: > Ok. This is a rant and you can remove it from the list if you want to > later. I just have to vent.
I don't think your mail will be removed as that's rather difficult with a mailing list :-) > Bacula is incredibly complex to setup. Its taken 4 months and its > still not working correctly. Now that's astonishing... four months after my initial contact with Bacula I had a number of customer setups running, using disks and tapes. > Things that should be easy that Bacula makes overly complex: > > Labeling tapes > Assigning tapes to pools > Reassigning tapes to pools > Managing disk media I really don't understand where that is overly complex. Doing all this is only one line in bconsole, beyond what you set up in the configuration. Even the configuration of a pool usually needs less than ten lines of text. > Things Bacula can't seem to get right: > > Detecting a tape is in the drive and using it > Even though the correctly labeled tape is in the drive, and has the > right Volume label, and is marked "Append", and is from the correct > Pool.... > Bacula is still waiting for a mount request. Every external program > recognizes that the tape is in the drive and mounted. Not Bacula Hard to comment on - the one issue we discussed wasn't really resolved, but that's something I can't exactly reproduce. My customers system, where I encountered that, works correctly with 2.2.5. > Catalog entries. I've not had a single backup job where the right > entries made it into the Catalog I can't reproduce that. > Windows hosts. Good luck figuring out the esoteric path syntax because > its different in different chapters of the manual and also different > depending on which part of the config you are editing Examples, perhaps even suggestions how to improve that? > Basically I can't see that its useable for anything more than backing > up a single system, and even then better be careful. I can confirm that many users, even really big ones, can rely on Bacula for their backups. > I'm going with Arkeia Network Backup. Might cost money, but at least > it will work as advertised which is more than can be said for Crapula Good luck with Arkeia. I found it to be extremely unreliable, for example with its license assignments. I never got a whole set of backups to complete correctly - something always got stuck, crashed, had to be re-configured, or something. Admittedly, that's some time ago, but then I switched to Bacula... Arno -- Arno Lehmann IT-Service Lehmann www.its-lehmann.de ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
