Re: Backup server

[Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 1/14/2010 9:23 AM, Max Hetrick wrote:
>
> That's what led me to BackupPC in the first place. We used to use
> rsnapshot here, and there were quite a few customized hacked together
> things that we thought were running nightly, and they really weren't.
> So, when I started investigating, I realized that our backups here
> hadn't been taking place for over a month. Bad! So, I found BackuPC to
> replace rsnapshot, and have been happy since then for our online offsite
>    backups.

Backuppc will at least send you an email when the backups have failed 
for 3 days in a row.

I probably should mention the one scenario it doesn't handle very well, 
though.  If you have very large files that have frequent small changes 
(active databases, logs, unix mailboxes, etc.), backuppc will store a 
complete new copy on every run, even though it may use rsync to only 
transfer the differences.  You may gain some space from compression, but 
the pooling scheme only works for files that are completely identical. 
File systems like zfs with block-level deduplication might be the best 
solution to deal with cases like that, or maybe rdiff-backup.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos