Hi,

On 11/15/2006 8:58 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
> On 15 Nov 2006 at 14:49, David W Borhani wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi, I am considering using bacula for my laboratory data backups. A few 
>>questions on whether it will work with my hardware, and regarding a few 
>>features:
>>
>>1.Will my hardware work w/ bacula?
>>        Tape Drive      Cybernetics CY-8102 AIT2 8 mm tape drive, 50/150 
>>GB, *** iSCSI ***
>>        System          Linux Redhat EL4, 2.6.xxxx kernel
> 
> 
> I have no idea.  :)

It should work as long as you use the standard devices to access the 
tape drive, i.e. /dev/nst0 for the tape drive.

Using the capabilities like fast seeking should work, too, but if it 
does I don't understand why the manufacturers own software can't do it.

> 
>>2. How fast can bacula find a file on a tape to restore (i.e., does it 
>>fast-forward to the right spot on the tape, or does it "read" through at 
>>the regular [slow] read/write speed)? Can it restore a file from the end 
>>of the tape in a few minutes, instead of hours?
> 
> 
> Bacula can fast-forward, if your OS/Tape drive allow it.  Adjust your 
> bacula-dir.conf file during the tape testing stage to get this 
> behaviour.

Better advust the bacula-sd.conf file :-)
By the way, it's not really very time consuming to download the bacula 
source (or rpm for your platform), install bacula, set up the SD and run 
the tests you'll run anyway once you decide to give it a try.

Testing the tape drive does not require a full Bacula setup with catalog 
database, jobs, and schedules.

> 
>>3. How are files written onto tape? Like (multiple) tar files, w/ 
>>filemarks. Or some other sort of format? In other words, can a 
>>bacula-written tape be recovered w/ tar (or some other standard, simple 
>>Linux utility) if needed?
> 
> 
> Yes to the last question.  See bls and bextract.

Of course, bls and bextract are not exactly standard unix utilities. But 
then, tar isn't, too, unless you use the right version with the correct 
options... I would even go so far to say that Bacula tape format is 
better portable than a tar archive. For tar, you'd need to know lots of 
details - which tar (gnu, posix, certain unix flavor), which options, 
which version. This happens, of course, once you need to read a tar 
archive after the last machine with <insert unix flavor here> died and 
you really need the data...

Arno

-- 
IT-Service Lehmann                    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Arno Lehmann                  http://www.its-lehmann.de

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Reply via email to