On 4/16/2019 10:45 AM, Dmitri Maziuk via Bacula-users wrote:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 23:24:10 -0300
Marcio Demetrio Bacci <marcioba...@gmail.com> wrote:
5. Currently the OS and Backup disks are on the same DRBD volume, so
would it be better to put the OS disk out of the DRBD volume? (the VM
has frequently crashing what makes me think that excessive writing on
the disk may be impacting the OS)
I would put everything out of drbd volume because quite frankly I don't
see the point. I don't think you can fail over in a middle of a backup,
and without that, why not just put OS on NFS? -- or ZFS and send
incremental snapshot as part of your manual failover. Using drbd for
backup storage is just a waste of disk.
Running jobs will fail, but the automated "Reschedule On Error" feature
allows restarting them after the fail-over. Also, fail-over doesn't
affect scheduled jobs that haven't started yet at the time of fail-over.
Putting the OS on DRBD and running in a VM (or container) allows
continuation of backup services without operator intervention. What is
wrong with that?
I agree that putting volume files on DRBD is wasteful, since running
jobs will always fail at fail-over, but putting just the OS on DRBD
doesn't use much disk space, and it certainly isn't a waste when it
reduces or eliminates operator intervention.
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
