Dear Amanda Administrators.
What dump configuration would you suggest for backing up a ZFS pool of
about 300GB? Within the pool there several smaller 'filesystems'.
Would you :
1. Use a script to implement ZFS snapshots and send these to the server
as the DLE?
2. Use tar to backup the
Using Amanda 2.5.1p1 under Debian Etch, my backups work fine, and I can
recover partitions from tape using dd, etc.
However:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo amrecover HomeDumps
AMRECOVER Version 2.5.1p1. Contacting server on localhost ...
NAK: amindexd: invalid service
What does this message mean, and
Hi all,
has anyone tried to have an amanda client running on an ASUS eeePC?
Regards,
Charles
--
Charles Stroom
email: charles at no-spam.stremen.xs4all.nl (remove the no-spam.)
Tony van der Hoff schrieb:
Using Amanda 2.5.1p1 under Debian Etch, my backups work fine, and I can
recover partitions from tape using dd, etc.
However:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo amrecover HomeDumps
AMRECOVER Version 2.5.1p1. Contacting server on localhost ...
NAK: amindexd: invalid service
Nick Smith wrote:
Dear Amanda Administrators.
What dump configuration would you suggest for backing up a ZFS pool of
about 300GB? Within the pool there several smaller 'filesystems'.
Would you :
1. Use a script to implement ZFS snapshots and send these to the server
as the DLE?
2.
On 25 Apr at 13:22 Stefan G. Weichinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tony van der Hoff schrieb:
Using Amanda 2.5.1p1 under Debian Etch, my backups work fine, and I can
recover partitions from tape using dd, etc.
However: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo amrecover
Hi everyone,
Ok I've had another go at compiling Amanda (2.5.2p1 is the source version
I have in use on other systems at present) on my Cobalt Raq-4i system, and
it's aborted when compiling dgram.c like this:
start
source='dgram.c' object='dgram.lo' libtool=yes \
DEPDIR=.deps
Tony van der Hoff schrieb:
I wish it were that simple.
What authentication do you use? Have you checked out the link
http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/Configuring_bsd/bsdudp/bsdtcp_authentication
at the Configuring xinetd section, too?
--
Marc Muehlfeld (Leitung Systemadministration)
Zentrum
Tony van der Hoff schrieb:
Thanks for taking an interest, Stefan; that's what I thought, too. I wish it
were that simple. Maybe I'm missing something, but what is wrong with this
(3 seperate files, each with the same name as the service):
#default: on
# description: The amanda index service
On 25 Apr at 14:02 Stefan G. Weichinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tony van der Hoff schrieb:
Thanks for taking an interest, Stefan; that's what I thought, too. I
wish it were that simple. Maybe I'm missing something, but what is wrong
with this (3 seperate files,
Jean-Louis-
It looks like that did the trick. I'll test a little more and let you
know for sure, but it correctly produced a dumps way to big, must
skip incremental dumps error and ran the rest of the dumps last night
after I applied the patch.
Thanks!
-Darrell
On Apr 23, 2008, at
Hi
unfortunately zfsdump, or zfs send as it is now, does not relate to
ufsdump in any way :-(
From man zfs
zfs send [-i snapshot1] snapshot2
Creates a stream representation of snapshot2, which is
written to standard output. The output can be redirected
to a
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 02:32:27PM +0100, Anthony Worrall wrote:
Hi
unfortunately zfsdump, or zfs send as it is now, does not relate to
ufsdump in any way :-(
[ big snip ]
One of the properties of zfs is that in encourages the use of a
filesystem for a logical set of files, i.e.
Anthony Worrall wrote:
Hi
unfortunately zfsdump, or zfs send as it is now, does not relate to
ufsdump in any way :-(
hmm. I guess I was being a bit naive.
I had assumed zfs development was more mature.
After reading the comments on this thread, I went searching for
references to zfsdump
Anthony Worrall wrote at 14:32 +0100 on Apr 25, 2008:
unfortunately zfsdump, or zfs send as it is now, does not relate to
ufsdump in any way :-(
Sorry to hijack this thread, but...
Can Solaris and/or ZFS snapshots support partial filesystem dumps (and
restores)? If not, how do people
neat
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Jon LaBadie
Sent: 25 April 2008 16:00
To: amanda-users@amanda.org
Subject: Re: Amanda and ZFS
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 02:32:27PM +0100, Anthony Worrall wrote:
Hi
unfortunately zfsdump,
Jon LaBadie wrote at 10:59 -0400 on Apr 25, 2008:
Another way would be to use include directives. For example, if the
zfs pool was /pool and had file systems of a, b,c, and d, you could
set up multiple DLEs that were rooted at /pool (different tag names)
and had include directives of
I started using ZFS in a big way over a year ago on our main file
server. Since there is no ufsdump replacement to use with ZFS, I
elected to use GNU tar. I know this doesn't yet cover backing up
things like ACLs, but we don't use them in our very heterogeneous
environment. The main idea I had
Pieter Bowman wrote at 11:41 -0600 on Apr 25, 2008:
The final issue I found was that the inode numbers in the snapshots
change each time a new snapshot is created. This is a problem with
GNU tar's listed-incremental facility. To work around this I ended up
hacking GNU tar to make it
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:46:34AM -0600, John E Hein wrote:
Jon LaBadie wrote at 10:59 -0400 on Apr 25, 2008:
Another way would be to use include directives. For example, if the
zfs pool was /pool and had file systems of a, b,c, and d, you could
set up multiple DLEs that were rooted at
Jon LaBadie wrote at 13:57 -0400 on Apr 25, 2008:
Though I've not tried it, it should.
I base that on the description of the command
/usr/sbin/ufsdump [options] [arguments] files_to_dump
and the belief that the include directive merely provides the args
corresponding to
...
The gtar devs finally accepted something to help with this problem:
--no-check-device.
...
Thanks, I hadn't caught the addition of that option. That also
reminds me that the problem isn't the inode number, but the device
number which was the problem.
Pieter
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 01:36:35PM -0600, John E Hein wrote:
Jon LaBadie wrote at 13:57 -0400 on Apr 25, 2008:
Though I've not tried it, it should.
I base that on the description of the command
/usr/sbin/ufsdump [options] [arguments] files_to_dump
and the belief that
Ok well putting the problems with 2.5.2p1 aside for now, I decided to give
the brand new 2.6.0 source tree a go, but it's failed during the configure
phase with this:
start
checking for pkg-config... no
checking for GLIB - version = 2.2.0... no
*** A new enough version of
24 matches
Mail list logo
