Hello all,
Since the rsync on Panther many things changed in my professional
life. This project is abandoned although it should work. But this you
already know. What's new? On my new job I have several servers to
administrate. Servers that aren't backed up (sic). So, there's why I'm
back to rsync.
The backup plan I would like:
1) Client side: PCs running rsync (or cwrsync with UTF-8 mod for long
names for windows ones). They run rsync (I don't need data encryption
so no need to ssh unless it's simpler) and pull data they want to the
backup server. This side is OK.
2) Server side: A standard PC with FreeNAS FreeBSD distrib, RAID-1
disks and rsync server. Here I would like the backups to be
incremental and rotated, with a sort of time stamp. Here is where
things get complicated.
Solutions I've found:
A - Simpler at the end but would need modifications to rsync: Go
further on the backup module of rsync, building in the rotate mv/rm
commands. Why simpler? Because a rsync client would only do one
command to the rsync server saying "there is it", and the server do
it's own internal cook with the stuff. No need to additional scripts.
I know that rsync isn't an incremental backup tool at the basis but a
syncing tool. But as it already do some of the work, why not doing it
better?
B - As I said before, additional scripts. Do the client open an ssh
connection, do the pre_backup.sh then close ssh (as I understood even
using ssh for rsync, it uses it own tunnel, and not an already opened
one, no?) run rsync, then rerun ssh, do the post_backup.sh. That
should work, but why scripting many times (I'm sure I'm not the only
one in this case) when it could be done once for all?
C - Between A and B solutions, rsync could, in a first time, have an
option to run pre and post scripts when running on ssh. In this manner
there would not be needed to open and close ssh 3 times.
D - I looked at rsnapshot, but it wouldn't help on this case of
rotating server side folders. I also found complicated scripts for
rotating folders from the server, but the client would need putting a
flag on the server saying syncing is done. All of this don't seem to
be the good approach for me. To much complicated to respond to some
lines of code missing on rsync (OK, missing for me but I know that
this isn't the original goal of rsync and it does lovely what it was
designed for).
Well, I'm not an rsync expert, so please correct my exposé if I'm
wrong. I think solution C would be easy to code, solution A would be
the ideal for me but requires some more functions. I'm ready to help
coding it. What do you think? Am I on the right path? Would this
addition being integrated to the main rsync (after testing, of
course)? Any other remarks or suggestions?
Best regards,
Vitorio--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list.
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
