Chuck Swiger wrote:
Nick Barnes wrote:
[ ... ]
3c: Opinions on using firewire hard disks for this at all? Would I be
better off writing DVDs?
Hard drives provide near-online backup, but only a single full
iteration. You can do incrementals to DVD or CD-RW or tape, and keep
many iterations handy, which is far more reliable.
A recent message on this list was from someone detailing the lengths
they went to to prevent DVD backups from becoming unusable. A search on
DVD ought to find it. Mind you, I have heard people say that DAT is
unreliable whereas (fingers crossed) it has proved fine for me.
3. making backups.
3a: I'm used to dump/restore, but it seems to me that rsync might be a
better tool for this, as it would allow me to mount and browse the
backup. Opinions?
This is good if you set up an entire system as a backup, although you
could dual-purpose that box and have it act as a fileserver, proxy
server, who knows, as well.
I was planning something along these lines as well. My intention is to
have an oldish box that I can rsync to at regular intervals (probably
from filesystem snapshots) in such a way that this would a) provide data
backup b) provide machine backup as well. In the meantime, it can be a
web server or a gateway or whatever.
Originally I was going to run a couple disks with hardware RAID 1, since
the motherboard has twin SATA RAID controllers. But I think I'm
changing my mind.
I've always been a bit dubious of the advantage of RAID 1. Starting
with two identical disks which came off the assembly line possibly
within minutes of each other, then assuming that one fails, I believe
that the odds of the second one also failing are greatly increased. And
ghods forbid, the disks you get turn out to be the next Deskstar 60 (or
was it 75?). Then there is the chance of controller failure. And then
there's the knowing if one of your RAID 1 disks has actually failed.
Unless there is a CLI for your RAID, or FreeBSD knows enough about it,
one disk could fail and you might not even know it, especially if you
don't reboot regularly, or don't watch the machine POST. On most
desktop machines, you're stuck with one disk activity LED, which is no
help. Even one LED per controller isn't good enough.
So my new plan is to have two disks running RAID 0 and to rsync them
regularly to a different kind of disk which isn't raided at all and
which is on a different controller, as well as to the remote machine.
If one of the raided disks fails, then I lose some amount of work,
depending on how often an rsync is practical. I'm prepared to live with
that risk given that I think RAID 0 will give great benefits in some of
the long-winded, disk-intensive, database-y stuff I do. No doubt
someone can tell me the error of my plan :-) So far, it is all theory.
This is in addition to tape.
David Kelly wrote:
There are a few select files on the root filesystem which are unique
to your system, everything else exists elsewhere such as on your
installation CDROM.
When you go to build your new filesystem keep a list of the files you
tweak. Suggest placing it in /root/important_file_list. Be sure to
list the important file list in your important file list.
tar -cvzf /home/myaccount/backups/today.tar.gz -T /root/
important_file_list
Size /usr sufficient for OS and application space but don't place
critical data there. Make /home your redundant mirror and put
everything critical there.
Can't argue with the principle. Don't forget that there are system
specific files on /usr/local as well. Most of it comes straight out of
ports but there there are the config files, tweaked startup files,
scripts in /usr/local/bin etc. Also, if you don't have a list of the
ports you have, then /var/db becomes important as well.
--Alex
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
