--On Thursday, May 21, 2015 11:09:58 AM -0500 dweimer <dwei...@dweimer.net> wrote:
> I have three systems two of which are using disk backup, then copy to > tape both of those are running on CentOS with 25G volume sizes [...] > The third system is using 46G File volumes Thanks. Good to know. > I wouldn't worry about Bacula's ability, but more the capabilities of the > file system and operating system its running on. FreeBSD, ZFS (RAID-Z2) thus large file support, large capacity commodity drives, but otherwise enterprise-grade gear. The bottleneck right now is network speeds; we probably need to go to 10GbE on the LAN, straight to the workstations. Believe me, I've been quite happy with Bacula over the years. This is just a case where the data pattern is unusual. My questions about issues was aimed more at second-order effects that might not be obvious in smaller installations. The tradeoff of volume size against number of volumes while satisfying retention times is one such. When I was saying that I'm not sure yet if Bacula is the right tool, that was not a reflection on Bacula but on the data. Certainly I will be using Bacula for the smaller working set, but the with the largest amount of data being write-once, that implies that I'm writing out that entire data set every month or two months (whatever the full schedule is) indefinitely. One of the options I'm considering is something like setting up pairs of drives in a ZFS mirror in removable drive caddies, putting sets of the write-once data on such pairs via rsync or some-such, and then making 3 or 4 copies of those pairs of drives as the archival copies. That way, each pair gets written *once*, gets put into cold storage, and not touched again (other than perhaps running a ZFS scrub on the copies every few years). The big advantage of that option is that the amount of data that needs to be written on a monthly/whatever basis is no more than the size of the working set (via Bacula) plus the size of one archive pair, rather than the size of the entire data set. The big down-side of that option is on the data management side; the lack of the equivalent of Bacula's catalog and all the software behind it. I've either got to create my own mechanism for keeping the catalog of those archive pairs, or find a tool that is already made for the purpose. Maybe CERN has something ... Devin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
