El 10/03/2011, a las 19:55, Michael Conner escribió: > Thanks to all who replied. You all basically confirmed my feeling that using > our web server as the backup server was not best practice. I just hoped we > might get by without buying another computer, even though it wouldn't need to > be a very expensive one. The only spare computer we have now is an old XP box > with some type of Celeron processor. Maybe I'll use that to set up a test > system, then get a better one for production. > > One additional question: are there any advantages to any particular flavor of > Linux for BPC? > > Mike >
II guess that's just a matter of preferences. I prefer Debian, all BackupPC installations I've done I've used Debian and never had a problem, plus, apt is the most robust package manager I've ever used. > On Mar 10, 2011, at 9:10 AM, Michael Stowe wrote: > >>> I'm looking at BackupPC and other options for a network-wide backup system >>> in the museum where I work. We have about 10 Windows computers, one OS X, >>> one web server running CENTOS 5.5, and an NAS (and may be adding another). >>> Note that my Linux knowledge is still limited but growing as I look at >>> more open source stuff. >>> >>> I've been reading the documentation and various other things on the web, >>> and one basic question I'm unsure about is whether it is possible or >>> advisable to run BPC on the web server. Is this even possible given the >>> Apache needs of BPC? It does seem that the program would work best on >>> dedicated computer, and then copy or archive the backups to another disk >>> or NAS for safety. But since we currently only have one Linux machine >>> (which is 64 bit and has open slots for additional drives), I was >>> wondering if it could be used, perhaps by limiting access of the cgi >>> scripts to localhost or network ip addresses. Also, if it is run on the >>> server, can it backup parts of the file system on the server? For example, >>> backup /var/www/html to its pool. >> >> Yes. >> >> Apache can have per-directory and per-virtual controls. Having all the >> backups on an externally-facing web server is a really bad idea only from >> a security standpoint -- since a compromised server would essentially >> provide access to every file everywhere as well as authentication >> information for every machine (depending on how you set it up.) If it's >> an internal server, there's not a whole lot of worry, then. >> >> Backing up the server from the same server guards against everything but >> complete loss of the server (obviously) so if you're concerned at all >> about losing the web server, you probably want to also consider archiving >> your backups at the very least. >> >>> Thanks for any help. >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> > Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Colocation vs. Managed Hosting A question and answer guide to determining the best fit for your organization - today and in the future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
