Steven S. Critchfield wrote: > ----- "Andrew Farnsworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> One thing to remember is to TEST both the backup AND the restore. >> Just >> because the backup finishes and reports no errors doesn't mean you >> can >> actually use the data. Test Test Test to be sure. >> > > Testing the backups was one of the things that sent me on a couple > week workout with bacula trying to understand why it took so long > to restore. We found out the original configuration would have taken > around 14 hours to restore our 140 gigs or so of data. Decided that > wasn't acceptable, and found performance tweaks in our install to > get it down in the 3 hour range. This was much more acceptable. > > > I was bitten by this years ago, on a small UNIX system where I was both the programmer and sysadmin. The backup system was making a faithful copy of the data passed to it; unfortunately, a hard drive controller problem meant it was making a faithful copy of data that had already been corrupted. Once I figured out what was going on, and replaced the bad hardware, I then had to restore a succession of backups until I finally got to one, two weeks old, that preceded the hardware failure.
-- John F. Eldredge -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available from http://pgp.mit.edu "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NLUG" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nlug-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
