On Tue, November 15, 2011 3:32 am, Grant wrote: >> You identified a flaw in the system as you were using it. You're right, >> those are flaws. However, you can " fix" those flaws by applying some >> magic >> as a sysadmin. That's why several posts in the thread have mentioned >> versioning your backups in some fashion. I've mentioned lvm a couple >> times. > > I thought versioning meant that you could roll back to a previous > version. rdiff-backup provides that.
It's part of it. >> I think someone else mentioned pulling the backup target's data to >> another >> locale, either via a pull from another server, or via something like a >> traditional incremental tape backup. > > So the systems push to the backup server and a second backup server > pulls from the first backup server? Should the second backup server > use rdiff-backup against the rdiff-backup repository on the first > backup server? I think I've read that's not a good idea. Not sure, I don't use rdiff-backup. Am considering it for the desktops once the new server is in place. > What does everybody else do? I feel like the first person to ever > attempt secure automated backups. For more secure backups, you could use backup-utilities that support incremental backups. "dar" springs to mind. So do larger automated systems. As my servers are all virtual machines running on Xen, I configured "pull" style backups. For the desktops, I am planning the following: "rdiff-backup" (or similar) to push backups from the desktops to the server. Adding hardlinks as already suggested for simple versioning. The backup-script in the desktop will do 2 things: 1) rdiff-backup 2) instruct the backup-server to create the hardlinks with versioning Then, at regular intervals, this will be backed up by "pull" from the Host-domain on the server. I don't see any chance to kill all my backups as the data will remain, even when deleting the backup-directory of a desktop. -- Joost
