Stay clear of busses then, please ;-) I find it weird, I did a whole lot of research and no S3 mapping solution is as clever and elaborate as S3QL. It's hard to believe no-one joins this project. At least I'm glad to see it is in the Ubuntu repository, that shows at least some validation. The restore-time is a valid remark - I have about 650 Gigs to backup and downloading this might result into an unacceptable speed. A second physical backup might compensate for this, though I will need to clearly explain to my client that restoring from S3 takes time. Since we have more download than upload speed, it might be acceptable though, need to test that. A suggestion I'd like to make is the addition of an example script that uses the snapshot feature to created versioned backups and the immutable tree to protect old versions. Maybe I will create a separate topic for that.
Thanks for all the good work, BC On Wednesday, October 26, 2016 at 12:51:24 PM UTC+2, Bart Coninckx wrote: > > Hi, > > I'n contemplating using S3QL to have a versioned backup system of my > fileserver as a replacement for the tape based backups. Can the S3QL > software be considered reliable and production ready as far as using it for > my purpose is concerned? > > > Cheers, > > > BC > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "s3ql" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
