On 2020-07-02 08:28, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
Il 02/07/20 15:02, Valeri Galtsev ha scritto:
On 7/2/20 3:22 AM, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
Il 01/07/20 17:13, Leroy Tennison ha scritto:
I realize this shouldn't happen, the file is a tgz and isn't being
modified while being transmitted. This has happened maybe three
times this year and unfortunately I've just had to deal with it
rather than invest the time to do the research.
Harriscomputer
Leroy Tennison
Network Information/Cyber Security Sp
Hi Leroy,
I think that in my case I could not use a tgz archive. I'm speaking
about full backups that reach 600/700GiB, compressing them and then
rsync them could take so much time that it will be useless.
unless you use tape (of that high capacity), it is advantageous to
restrict volume size to, say, 50GB. Then when you restore, search for
specific files will be faster. And it will help your backup volumes
transfers as well.
Valeri
Hi Valeri,
thank you for your suggestion.
Is bacula the right backup system when I need to replicate data offsite?
There are other backup solution that simplify this process?
Bacula is great enterprise level open source backup system. I switched
to its fork bareos at some point; I use bacula/bareos for at least a
decade. And with this your extra requirement I still would stay with
bareos (or bacula).
If I were to have two sets of backup: on site and off site, I would just
set up separate bacula/bareos director and storage daemon(s) off site.
Add to FDs (file daemons) extra instances of director - offsite one with
different passwords for the sake of security. Then there will be a set
of everything off site, not only a set of volumes. Of course, if you
only have a set of volumes, but everything else has evaporated, you
still will be able to restore everything, including database records by
scanning set of volumes. Which will take forever. I would alternate
dates of backups in offsite/onsite schedules, or define times of backups
so that they do not overlap.
Another good news of this vs just rsyncing volumes is: bacula/bareos
verifies checksum of every backed up file after receiving it. This will
ensure consistency of files in remote volumes, for rsync you will have
to at least verify checksum of each volume transferred to destination
(unless I miss my wits and rsync does verify checksums of files
transferred, I just re-read rsync man and don't see verification -
hopefully rsync expert will chime in and correct me if I'm wrong about
rsync).
Anyway, that is what I would do.
Valeri
Thank you in advance
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
