Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula 9.0.3 on Debian 9.1 with OpenSSL-1.0.2l doubts

Hi Kern, Kern Sibbald writes: > It has been a long time since the Bacula Community version supports > SQLite3. The code is still there, but it simply does not perform > well, and so it is not at all suitable for a Bacula production > environment. The only two officially

Re: [Bacula-users] 9.0.3 static client

On Aug 28, 2017, at 1:42 PM, Dan Langille wrote: > >> On Aug 28, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Dan Langille > > wrote: >> >> Have you build the static client for 9.0.3? >> >> In my testing, two things have come to light: >> >> 1 - file

Re: [Bacula-users] 9.0.3 static client

> On Aug 28, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Dan Langille wrote: > > Have you build the static client for 9.0.3? > > In my testing, two things have come to light: > > 1 - file names have changed: static-bacula-fd (was bacula-fd-static) & > static-bconsole (was bconsole-static). > > 2 -

[Bacula-users] 9.0.3 static client

Have you build the static client for 9.0.3? In my testing, two things have come to light: 1 - file names have changed: static-bacula-fd (was bacula-fd-static) & static-bconsole (was bconsole-static). 2 - binaries are not installed. Perhaps this is related to issue 1. What has been your

Re: [Bacula-users] cloud command?

The cloud driver has not yet been released.  I expect that it will be out in January 2018. Kern On 08/28/2017 10:13 AM, KEN SAWADA wrote: Hi! I installed bacula 9.0.3. I saw bconsole's help and found a cloud command. Is

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula 9.0.3 on Debian 9.1 with OpenSSL-1.0.2l doubts

Thanks. I will fix that right away. Best regards, Kern On 08/27/2017 07:22 PM, Davide Franco wrote: Hello, Just for your information, the main manual for version 9.0.3 still mention SQLite.

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula 9.0.3 on Debian 9.1 with OpenSSL-1.0.2l doubts

Hello Carsten, It has been a long time since the Bacula Community version supports SQLite3. The code is still there, but it simply does not perform well, and so it is not at all suitable for a Bacula production environment. The only two officially supported databases are MySQL and

Re: [Bacula-users] Anyone using AWS tape gateway or other similar service?

On 08/28/17 07:50, Josh Fisher wrote: > I have considered a cloud solution as an off-site storage, but abandoned > it for now for due to that very reason. Cloud storage is simply not yet > fast enough, or I should say that the Internet is not yet fast enough. > What if the restore would require

Re: [Bacula-users] Anyone using AWS tape gateway or other similar service?

I agree Josh. As we review this current internet speed limitation more, I think we will use AWS cloud for servers with small to moderate data size. For example, a Linux server which manages a web app and has a total disk size of under 50 GB will go to the cloud. Servers with storage which

Re: [Bacula-users] cloud command?

Hello, Ken, > I installed bacula 9.0.3. > I saw bconsole's help and found a cloud command. > Is this a command that can be backed up to AWS, Azure, etc? > Sample configuration file could not be found on bacula.org. > Do you have samples? Community Bacula 9.0.x has now support to different

Re: [Bacula-users] Anyone using AWS tape gateway or other similar service?

On 8/25/2017 1:49 PM, Luke Salsich wrote: One remaining concern which I have (not related to Bacula at all) is the time it would take to conduct a complete system restore due to needing to transfer the data from AWS to our local. Even with their fast connection, a 150 GB transfer could take

[Bacula-users] cloud command?

Hi! I installed bacula 9.0.3. I saw bconsole's help and found a cloud command. Is this a command that can be backed up to AWS, Azure, etc? Sample configuration file could not be found on bacula.org. Do you have samples?