On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Doug Silver wrote: > > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > I've got a server farm of about 30 machines, most on various RedHat > > > distributions, a few AIX. > > > I have 3 tape drives, an 8, a 24 and a 40Gig, all HP DAT tapes. > > > I have 10 physical backup tapes available for each drive. > > > The tape drives are attached to 3 linux computers, Columbia, Frith & Coffee, > > > respectively, which have Amanda 2.4.1p1 servers. All the clients are > > > running either 2.4.1p1 or 2.4.2p2 . > > > Questions: > > > - is this a sane configuration? > > > - is this a better configuration than throwing 3 tape drives on 1 amanda server? > > > - is this a better configuration than just using 1 tape drive on 1 amanda >server (the 40, obviously) and using more tapes? > > > - what would you recommend for the way to ease into backing up this lot? > > > i.e. uncomment 1/2 of the disklist descriptions the first night, 1/2 the > > > second, or 1/4 the first, for 4 days... or ??? > > > > > > > > > > You didn't specify why you might want to be using the 2 smaller tape > > drives -- other than the drives are there and feel guilty about them > > gathering dust ;) > > Ah, guilt has something to do with it, but another factor is bandwidth > and spreading out the load... And I was thinking, "Let's put all the > technical configuration data like /etc, /boot, and so on to be backed up > by one server, and the mail to another, and users' files to a third..." > so it wouldn't be difficult to figure out which server to go to for a > restore. Plus, we already have the tapes for the other drives... vs. > buying new tapes for the 40Gb at $20 a pop. We have been having problems > because the users' files and the mail files exceed the capacity of a > single 40 Gig tape, so we can't seem to get it to do an initial backup of > those filesystems to complete. One or the other, but not both.
That makes sense, though if you're already breaking up partitions with gtar, that might allow you some flexibility with the user/mail files. You could make an exclude list and have two "mail" and two "user" partitions. You could set it up this way with the intention of moving everything towards the 40Gb drive in the future once money becomes a bit easier to justify. With ~30 clients, you'll have to figure out the total capacity it would take if you wanted to back everything up and how many tapes that would take on your dumpcycle. > Right... maybe I should have said "Do you think this is a workable idea?" > and then, "How do you rate it compared to a single host backup?" > My sanity is often called into question... > > John > It seems reasonable that you're going to have to go this route based on your current resources. While I'd love to have the latest AIT or tape jukebox, DDS4 is working just fine and I have no choice (or desire) to change in the near future. Good luck! -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Doug Silver Network Manager Urchin Corporation http://www.urchin.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
