Kern Sibbald wrote:
Hello,
On Saturday 23 February 2008 08.02:45 John Enok Vollestad wrote:
The following is a showstopper for what I want to use Bacula for at work:
Item: 1 Accurate restoration of renamed/deleted files
Since comercial alternatives is far from cheap it might be less
expensive to fund the development of this features in Bacula.
Do anyone have any estimate of what this would cost and how long it
would take to get ready for production?
This project is already well underway, so no funding is required, though a
really nice contribution to the Bacula project or the developer would be much
appreciated.
:-)
Will send a portion of what we save.
Is it possible to get a receipe of "yearly / qarterly support" or
something like that - preferable as a PDF with logo so it does not look
like charity but more like paying for work - which is how i view it.
The code is implemented and in what I would call a pre-alpha state. It
currently exists as a patch and if my review of the code goes well and on
schedule, the code should be integrated into the SVN trunk by next Monday.
There will then be some more work (certain details are not yet complete), and
a *lot* of testing to do.
Since we are all volunteers doing implementation for free, we do not feel
bound by any fixed schedules. However, that said, I am currently planning
the official production release of the next version (which will have Accurate
backup) by the end of June 2008. It can be tested at any time, but should be
ready for beta testing (of that feature) within about a month.
We will follow the email-lists and start testing it then.
A good amount of the very low level routines of Bacula have been re-written
from scratch in this version, so the needed testing goes far beyond just
testing particular features.
Understood that there might be
an opportunity to use the validation mechanism during an backup.
I don't understand what you mean in the above sentence. Could you explain?
Probably my misunderstanding / forgetfullness. I do not find the source
now . Have tried to read a lot the past days and I thought that it was
mentioned in a bug-report that one could use mechanisms used in
validation when implementing this project but I can not find it now so
probably just my eyes that crossed.
We can of course do a lot of the testing.
That would *really* be appreciated.
Is there any lists of tests that should be run?
We are currently using Legato to tape (LTO2) today but the restore time
is too long and it lack movement detection as far as I have understood.
Backup to disk would therefore require a lot of full backups to have
backups without too large differences from the source thus require a lot
more diskspace thereby making it more expensive.
Well, I would really be pleased if we can provide an important feature that
Networker does not have. I do know that TSM has this feature, but as with
Bacula the admin must explicitly enable it as it requires additional
resources (searches) to implement.
The detection of moving files and directories is not implemented on
Legato to my knowledge. It is implemented on Networker and is called
"move detection".
Legato were installed here 3,5 years ago partly because of the plugin
support. This plugin support is now less needed as the services that
needed special plugins is now inside virtual computers that we backup
with snapshots and then copy as ordinary files.
We have the following system to backup:
10TB of data
55GB of changes every day
Retention time 1 year but we do not need to keep every single day for a
full year.
That sounds pretty typical (not particularly large) of the kinds of Backups
that are being done using Bacula.
As for hardware we wanted to use an areca 1680 controller and
SAS-extenders between some supermicro boxes and large disks.
Uh, hopefully someone else can comment on those since I don't know what they
are (well supermicro boxes and big disks do make sense) ...
For those interested:
One nice thing with the supermicro boxes is the ability to daicy-chain
with SAS-extenders. The Areca controller also have the opportunity to
online increase the size of raid-sets and volumes in combination with
raid 6, global hotspare, up to 128 disks and good performance. Combined
we can add shelfs and disks as needed.
One may put a motherboard in or one can use it just as a shelf. There
are contacts for the SAS-extenders in the back of the box.
http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/3U/836/SC836E2-R800V.cfm
The Areca controller:
http://www.areca.com.tw/products/pcietosas1680series.htm
http://tweakers.net/benchdb/testcombo/1628
http://tweakers.net/benchdb/test/114
http://tweakers.net/benchdb/test/100
One of the things I like most with the Areca controllers is that the
disks in a raid-set contain the raid-information and can be moved to a
newer or other type of areca-controller or another newer disk-shelf.
One can splitt the disks using two shelfs - as long as the controller
see all the disks needed for the volume it should work. It can also
spin down disks not used. And management is possible out of band by an
ethernet port on the card.
Best regards,
Kern
Thanks a lot :-)
John Enok
PS: I have added bacula-users to the list so that they can see what is
coming :-)
Hope my reply fits both lists.
--
John Enok
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
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
