Keep in mind, the reason tapes are still a good way to back things up: 1) Large capacity. You can get tapes with 150GB per tape compressed for example. This is handy. 2) Removeable. You can store a few offsite... or if the backup server goes belly up due to a hardware failure, you can move the tape drive and tapes to another system.
Now, the real reason you backup things using levels is: 1) if a tape fails you can go back a few days or weeks to a previous tape. 2) mirroring gets you an exact copy of what you have on the original. So if 100 files get corrupt one day, then 100 files get corrupt on the mirror the next time you sync. The only way to recover is if you happen to notice the recovery before the re-sync happens. This sucks sometimes since you don't notice for a few days (thus the idea of retenion). 3) It's nice to see how much MB of data is changing on your systems from day to day if you are the admin. i.e. 2GB changed in one day on one of my systems and it put up a flag to poke around and see what was going on with that box, turned out to be a process writing too many logs which could be deleted. --- Jason Hines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, I was hoping I could explain my server setup and > situation, and > someone could tell me if Amanda would be the best > solution. > > I am administrating 4 servers, one of which is a > dedicated backup server. > > I'd like to backup certain files/directories from > all 3 of the server > onto a harddisk on the backup server. > > I could easily accomplish this with a Perl script > using rsync/tar, but > I'm wondering about the advantages Amanda would have > over this. > > Any recommendations / advice appreciated, thanks. > > jason > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
