On Sat, 13 Aug 2005, Philipp Steinkrueger wrote:
yes, that would be enough to meet my needs, but it would have a big
disadvantage
over my scheme, because duplicating media would take _hours_. we calculated,
that for our current data to be fully backuped, it would take more than 10
hours.
It
Phil Stracchino wrote:
Philipp Steinkrueger wrote:
Phil Stracchino wrote:
Well, there are future features coming that will make much of this
easier, including the copy job (duplicate media), and the migration job
(migrate a job from disk to tape). These would allow you to:
1. Make ful
Philipp Steinkrueger wrote:
> Phil Stracchino wrote:
>> Well, there are future features coming that will make much of this
>> easier, including the copy job (duplicate media), and the migration job
>> (migrate a job from disk to tape). These would allow you to:
>>
>> 1. Make full backup
>> 2. Dupli
Phil Stracchino wrote:
Philipp Steinkrueger wrote:
Okay, i'll try to explain my idea again:
I have two primary goals:
G1: Protect data against burn down of the autochanger location
G2: Be able to restore any data anytime without inserting tapes into the
autochanger
I dont think there are
Philipp Steinkrueger wrote:
> Okay, i'll try to explain my idea again:
>
> I have two primary goals:
>
> G1: Protect data against burn down of the autochanger location
> G2: Be able to restore any data anytime without inserting tapes into the
> autochanger
>
> I dont think there are many options
Hi Phil,
I'm not sure I see what you're after here. In general, it would be a
bad idea -- and increase the amount of data to back up -- to make a
differential against anything BUT the latest full backup. I utterly
fail to see how intentionally running a differential against an older
Full backu
Philipp Steinkrueger wrote:
> Hi Kern,
>
>
> thanx for your reply. i see these options are not supported, so
> it seems my idea cannot be realized... anyway, have you read
> my other post and got my idea ? if i am right than my concept would
> minimze data loss about 50% in case of a burn down. f
Hello,
I saw your previous post, but it is the kind of question that I leave to the
list to answer.
On Friday 12 August 2005 17:05, Philipp Steinkrueger wrote:
> Hi Kern,
>
>
> thanx for your reply. i see these options are not supported, so
> it seems my idea cannot be realized... anyway, have y
Hi Kern,
thanx for your reply. i see these options are not supported, so
it seems my idea cannot be realized... anyway, have you read
my other post and got my idea ? if i am right than my concept would
minimze data loss about 50% in case of a burn down. for me that
seems to be a too great deal n
On Friday 12 August 2005 16:05, Philipp Steinkrueger wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
> as my post about backup strategy and concepts from the 5th
> is still unanswered, i am trying to break down my, i have to
> admit, long question.
>
> i think all i need to do what i want is a possibility to tell
> bacula to
Hi all,
as my post about backup strategy and concepts from the 5th
is still unanswered, i am trying to break down my, i have to
admit, long question.
i think all i need to do what i want is a possibility to tell
bacula to do differential backups against a specific full
backup and not against th
11 matches
Mail list logo
