Hello, śr., 24 kwi 2024 o 10:21 Mehrdad Ravanbod <mehrdad.ravan...@ampfield.se> napisał(a):
> Hi > > You right in saying that bacula can use VSS to do backups in Windows > systems, however It is my understanding that the VSS backup file is put > into a "volume" file which makes it not accesible to VSS tools. In a > windows system u can do straight VSS backup which can then be read by VSS > tools and chcked/restored, however this not practical when there are many > clients even with automation via powershell or other form of scripting. > having a backup system to easily check the state of backups and keeping > track of them is abetter solution, which is why i am considering bacula > > As I said i am new to bacula, so it maybe that it is possible to do > backups(VSS or otherwise) with bacula that does not use "Volume" files(I am > backing up to disk, not a a tape drive) > So you are not referring to VSS, but any backup created by Bacula, right? You are concerned that Bacula creates a Bacula Volume or Volumes, where all backups are stored. Is this what you want to avoid? It is not about VSS, but how Bacula stores its backups? > So I guess this is what my questions is, is it possible to get Bacula to > do backups with VSS(or even otherwise, simple file copying with or without > compression/encryption) without using "Volume" files, i.e the backup files > are saved as indiviual files and not all put together in a "volume" file. > A simple question is no. You can't create a fully working, platform independent backup without using Volume files (which are basically archive files like zip, tar, etc.). A single file backup includes multiple data streams for this file: metadata, data, acl data, xattr data, resource forks, encryption data, deduplication references, etc. Bacula Volume can store all different backup streams in a single file you can copy elsewhere having all data you require for full recovery. Even a billion files can be saved in the single volume in the space efficient, optimal way. OTOH, why do you need to avoid Bacula Volume? This volume is like tar or zip, and people do your backups with it without complaints. > The volume files seem to be there more for a tape based system, the > concept is not really neded if you are backing up to disk > Not true. A single file (volume) has advantages on disks too: it is a single directory entry, faster throughput on both write and read, space efficient especially for small files, platform independent, support multiple streams and distinct attributes for single file, easy and fast copy to different location or machine, etc. An advantage one could think of is that a restore from directory tree archive could be faster for a multi-terabyte backup when you need to restore a single small file. But Bacula keeps track of every file archived in volume (some kind of indexing) and such restore takes almost no time as Bacula can seek to the required location and read from there - for every distinct file. So, no advantage at all. best regards -- Radosław Korzeniewski rados...@korzeniewski.net
_______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
