[Bacula-users] Windows client firewalling problem
I recently upgraded my bacula from 2.4 to 3.0. Almost everything works beautifully, except for one Windows 2008 Standard client machine (64 version). This machine is running the 64-bit version of winbacula 3.0.2. The directory and SD both are on other machines on the same subnet. The Windows server uses Microsoft's Windows Advanced firewall. The error message is: 07-Dec 01:36 akechi-denki-fd JobId 435: Fatal error: Authorization key rejected by Storage daemon. Please see http://www.bacula.org/en/rel-manual/Bacula_Freque_Asked_Questi.html#SECTION00376 for help. 07-Dec 01:36 akechi-denki-fd JobId 435: Fatal error: Failed to authenticate Storage daemon. 07-Dec 01:36 nctechcenter-dir JobId 435: Fatal error: Bad response to Storage command: wanted 2000 OK storage , got 2902 Bad storage I added both inbound and outbound rules to the Windows firewall to allow all connections to and from bacula-fd.exe . The firewall log also shows that the connections from the director to port 9102, and from the fd to the SD's port 9103 are successful. I do not see any blocked connections listed at all. Yet I found that the problem goes away when I turn off the Windows firewall. So I am trying to find out what else the firewall might be doing to interfere with bacula, what other rules I might need. Thanks! -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Very slow interactive restore
Christoph Litauer schrieb: Arno Lehmann schrieb: Hi, 24.11.2009 08:59, Christoph Litauer wrote: Christoph Litauer schrieb: Jesper Krogh schrieb: Christoph Litauer wrote: Thanks! One last question (hopefully): How big is /var/lib/mysql/ibdata1? 282GB on ext3 Dear Jesper, in the meantime I made a test setup - not successfull 'til now regarding the performance. What I forgot to ask: What mysql-DB version are you running? And another demand, please: Could you - or someone else - please select any JobId and execute the following (my)sql-statement: mysqlEXPLAIN SELECT Path.Path, Filename.Name, File.FileIndex, File.JobId, File.LStat FROM ( SELECT max(FileId) as FileId, PathId, FilenameId FROM ( SELECT FileId, PathId, FilenameId FROM File WHERE JobId IN (insert your JobId here) ) AS F GROUP BY PathId, FilenameId ) AS Temp JOIN Filename ON (Filename.FilenameId = Temp.FilenameId) JOIN Path ON (Path.PathId = Temp.PathId) JOIN File ON (File.FileId = Temp.FileId) WHERE File.FileIndex 0 ORDER BY JobId, FileIndex ASC Please post the result. Thanks in advance! Sure... mysql EXPLAIN SELECT Path.Path, Filename.Name, File.FileIndex, File.JobId, File.LStat FROM ( SELECT max(FileId) as FileId, PathId, FilenameId FROM ( SELECT FileId, PathId, FilenameId FROM File WHERE JobId IN (11902)) AS F GROUP BY PathId, FilenameId ) AS Temp JOIN Filename ON (Filename.FilenameId = Temp.FilenameId) JOIN Path ON (Path.PathId = Temp.PathId) JOIN File ON (File.FileId =Temp.FileId) WHERE File.FileIndex 0 ORDER BY JobId, FileIndex ASC; ++-+++---+-+-+-+---+-+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | ++-+++---+-+-+-+---+-+ | 1 | PRIMARY | derived2 | ALL| NULL | NULL| NULL | NULL| 60905 | Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | PRIMARY | Path | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | Temp.PathId | 1 | | | 1 | PRIMARY | Filename | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | Temp.FilenameId | 1 | | | 1 | PRIMARY | File | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 8 | Temp.FileId | 1 | Using where | | 2 | DERIVED | derived3 | ALL| NULL | NULL| NULL | NULL| 60905 | Using temporary; Using filesort | | 3 | DERIVED | File | ref| JobId,JobId_2 | JobId_2 | 4 | | 52471 | | ++-+++---+-+-+-+---+-+ 6 rows in set (6.99 secs) This is a MyISAM catalog with 14776513 Files, 1163114 FileNames, and 198492 Paths. Machine is a Dual-Core Opteron with 2GB RAM and a decent disk subsystem. MySQL is not exactly configured for maximum performance. Thanks a lot Arno. May I ask you too, how long an interactive restore of a big filesystem takes to build the directory tree? Seems as if I found the reason: I had been running version 3.0.2 which uses a comlicated sql statement as the above to build the directory tree. Version 3.0.3 uses more but simpler sql queries ... I read the release notes for this version once again but couldn't find any hint regarding that fix. -- Kind regards Christoph Christoph Litauer lita...@uni-koblenz.de Uni Koblenz, Computing Center, http://www.uni-koblenz.de/~litauer Postfach 201602, 56016 Koblenz Fon: +49 261 287-1311, Fax: -100 1311 PGP-Fingerprint: F39C E314 2650 650D 8092 9514 3A56 FBD8 79E3 27B2 -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
[Bacula-users] 287GB data, 100MB/day, 2 weeks restore. Howto setup
Hi Hi. I have a customer that has 287 GB of data that's needs to be backuped. The change of this data is probably around 100MB per day. The customer wants to be able to restore files 2 weeks back in time. How do I set this up so it requires so little space as possible? I was thinking about using this new Virtual Backup (Vbackup) feature that exist from 3.0 version. One full backup and 13 incremental backups will always exist. When a new incremental backup is added, the oldest incremental is later merged with the full backup by a script same day. Is this possible? I guess I will get into problem if bacula suddenly decides to do a full backup because something in the config file has changed. Well well.. -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
[Bacula-users] Bacula Problem Storage File
Hello Together, I get the folloing message when I ask for the Status of Storage File Fatal error: bsock.c:135 Unable to connect to Storage daemon on backupsrv.ke-si.intern:9103. ERR=Connection refused DNS is correct Sever Name is checkt many times FQN is in hosts too. Password is proofed. When I use telnet i get refused too. Do anybody has got an Idea? Tankx for your help Oli -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Bacula-Problem-Storage-File-tp26657347p26657347.html Sent from the Bacula - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Problem Storage File
I get the folloing message when I ask for the Status of Storage File Fatal error: bsock.c:135 Unable to connect to Storage daemon on backupsrv.ke-si.intern:9103. ERR=Connection refused DNS is correct Sever Name is checkt many times FQN is in hosts too. Password is proofed. When I use telnet i get refused too. Do anybody has got an Idea? My first question is do you have 127.0.0.1 or localhost in your bacula-dir.conf? John -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Problem Storage File
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 9:56 AM, John Drescher dresche...@gmail.com wrote: I get the folloing message when I ask for the Status of Storage File Fatal error: bsock.c:135 Unable to connect to Storage daemon on backupsrv.ke-si.intern:9103. ERR=Connection refused DNS is correct Sever Name is checkt many times FQN is in hosts too. Password is proofed. When I use telnet i get refused too. Do anybody has got an Idea? My first question is do you have 127.0.0.1 or localhost in your bacula-dir.conf? Also bacula-sd.conf? John -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Problem Storage File
On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 06:33:59AM -0800, Oliver Knittel wrote: Hello Together, I get the folloing message when I ask for the Status of Storage File Fatal error: bsock.c:135 Unable to connect to Storage daemon on backupsrv.ke-si.intern:9103. ERR=Connection refused DNS is correct Sever Name is checkt many times FQN is in hosts too. Password is proofed. When I use telnet i get refused too. Do anybody has got an Idea? Tankx for your help Oli could your storage daemon be listening on a different ip? the fact you don't get a connection via telnet is a giveaway of sorts... Uwe -- uwe.schuerk...@nionex.net fon: [+49] 5242.91 - 4740, fax:-69 72 Hauptsitz: Avenwedder Str. 55, D-33311 Gütersloh, Germany Registergericht Gütersloh HRB 4196, Geschäftsführer: H. Gosewehr, D. Suda NIONEX ist ein Unternehmen der DirectGroup Germany www.directgroupgermany.de -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Problem Storage File
Since telnet is refused, too, odds are that either there is a firewall involved, or the FQDN resolves to the wrong host. BTW, telnet failing is no longer always a reliable indicator of whether the firewall is configured correctly, since many firewalls have different rules on a per-application basis. So telnet may fail and bacula succeeds, or vice versa. -Original Message- From: Oliver Knittel [mailto:o...@systemhaus-kec.de] Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 6:34 AM To: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Bacula-users] Bacula Problem Storage File Hello Together, I get the folloing message when I ask for the Status of Storage File Fatal error: bsock.c:135 Unable to connect to Storage daemon on backupsrv.ke-si.intern:9103. ERR=Connection refused DNS is correct Sever Name is checkt many times FQN is in hosts too. Password is proofed. When I use telnet i get refused too. Do anybody has got an Idea? Tankx for your help Oli -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Bacula-Problem- Storage-File-tp26657347p26657347.html Sent from the Bacula - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --- --- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
[Bacula-users] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Bacula TimeMachine type SOHOconfig?
timo-n...@tee-en.net (Timo Neuvonen) writes: Simon J Mudd sjm...@pobox.com kirjoitti viestissä ... Yes, but that's what I'm trying to avoid. I realise that I MUST have sufficient space really for at least 2 full backups plus some extra for incrementals but I don't want to worry about the details. Therefore I want to configure You said you don't want to worry about the details. However, one such very strong detail is the schedule you already have specified, it says to run a full backup once a month. Required retention time is closely related to this, and needs to be specified too. Again, I think you're missing the point. You are right, in a business environment you do want to decide to do X full backups every certain period of time, X incrementals etc. and then you need to do some calculations to work out how much disk space you need for this. This value of course changes and you may later need to add more storage or tapes or whatever to accommodate these changes. Think of the normal HOME user who may have an interest in Bacula to backup data. He has a unix PC with disks occupying say 100GB of space. So he buys himself a 1TB external USB disk and wants to use that for backups. If it's dedicated he'll want to use ALL the space for backups and keep as much as he can. So he's likely to want to do perhaps a single weekly or monthly backup followed by incrementals in between. Exactly how many backups he keeps is relatively unimportant. And for this type of scenario bacula is tricky (from what I can see) to setup. I've had multiple problems (due to misconfiguration) of bacula not labelling new disk devices in the pool and also when the disk starts to fill up of not removing the oldest backups. I'm not a backup administrator and have plenty of other distractions which prevent me properly working out how to get bacula running properly. That's why I suggested a recipe for the type of configuration I suggest might be extremely useful. Since now you haven't specified the volume retention, Bacula uses its internal default which is one year, 365 days. You have to specify a shorter volume retention time if you want to be able to recycle the volumes sooner. But I dont' want retention to depend on time, but disk usage. ... Btw, you can use list media command to see the status of the existing volumes. so while you can define how many volumes to have and their sizes you can't get bacula to purge based on these values? ... the pool to auto purge if it fills up. New full or incremental backups will create new volumes as needed, and the older ones will get purged. Actually, Bacula will recycle the existing volumes, that is, discard the old data in the volume, and use the same recycled volume again. So the volume name won't change (unless this is possible due to some very new Bacula feature). That's fine. In the end I don't care howe the volumes are labelled, or if new ones are created or existing ones are reused. Within reasonable limits (reasonable amount of disk space available), this should be possible with Bacula. So it sounds part of my problem has been to misunderstand the precise terms used in Bacula. It sounds like I don't want to purge the disk volumes, but to recycle them. So how do I configure this: - A fixed number of disk volumes of a predetermined size which will be recycled when no more space is left? Ideally the recycling in this simple case would be based on a FIFO type principal. Simon -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Problem Storage File
Oliver Knittel wrote: Hello Together, I get the folloing message when I ask for the Status of Storage File Fatal error: bsock.c:135 Unable to connect to Storage daemon on backupsrv.ke-si.intern:9103. ERR=Connection refused DNS is correct Sever Name is checkt many times FQN is in hosts too. Password is proofed. When I use telnet i get refused too. Do anybody has got an Idea? Tankx for your help Oli To add some lines to other good advise : - Mixed version of dir / sd , don't think so - Recents update of openssl without a cold restart (running process using old deleted libs) -- Bruno Friedmann -- Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Bacula TimeMachinetype SOHOconfig?
Simon J Mudd sjm...@pobox.com kirjoitti viestissä news:m3fx7mkdv3@mad06.wl0.org... timo-n...@tee-en.net (Timo Neuvonen) writes: Simon J Mudd sjm...@pobox.com kirjoitti viestissä ... Yes, but that's what I'm trying to avoid. I realise that I MUST have sufficient space really for at least 2 full backups plus some extra for incrementals but I don't want to worry about the details. Therefore I want to configure You said you don't want to worry about the details. However, one such very strong detail is the schedule you already have specified, it says to run a full backup once a month. Required retention time is closely related to this, and needs to be specified too. Again, I think you're missing the point. You are right, in a business environment you do want to decide to do X full backups every certain period of time, X incrementals etc. and then you need to do some calculations to work out how much disk space you need for this. This value of course changes and you may later need to add more storage or tapes or whatever to accommodate these changes. Think of the normal HOME user who may have an interest in Bacula to backup data. He has a unix PC with disks occupying say 100GB of space. So he buys himself a 1TB external USB disk and wants to use that for backups. If it's dedicated he'll want to use ALL the space for backups and keep as much as he can. So he's likely to want to do perhaps a single weekly or monthly backup followed by incrementals in between. Exactly how many backups he keeps is relatively unimportant. And for this type of scenario bacula is tricky (from what I can see) to setup. I've had multiple problems (due to misconfiguration) of bacula not labelling new disk devices in the pool and also when the disk starts to fill up of not removing the oldest backups. I'm not a backup administrator and have plenty of other distractions which prevent me properly working out how to get bacula running properly. That's why I suggested a recipe for the type of configuration I suggest might be extremely useful. Since now you haven't specified the volume retention, Bacula uses its internal default which is one year, 365 days. You have to specify a shorter volume retention time if you want to be able to recycle the volumes sooner. But I dont' want retention to depend on time, but disk usage. Bacula can use all disk space you allow it to use, that is controlled with volume size and maximum number of volumes, that you had set to reasonable values in the configuration. The volume retention time is just a minimum time limit; if your disk space will allow it, the old data in un-recycled volumes will still be available there after much longer time (in theory, forever). I think this is what you wanted, so I can't see any actual problem there. But if you absolutely don't want to change the default volume retention time to something that would fit to your application, there isn't much else to do, I think. Explicitly specifying the volume retention time is the only way to make Bacula recycle the volumes in less than a year, since 365 days is Bacula's internal default. ... Btw, you can use list media command to see the status of the existing volumes. so while you can define how many volumes to have and their sizes you can't get bacula to purge based on these values? ... the pool to auto purge if it fills up. New full or incremental backups will create new volumes as needed, and the older ones will get purged. Actually, Bacula will recycle the existing volumes, that is, discard the old data in the volume, and use the same recycled volume again. So the volume name won't change (unless this is possible due to some very new Bacula feature). That's fine. In the end I don't care howe the volumes are labelled, or if new ones are created or existing ones are reused. Within reasonable limits (reasonable amount of disk space available), this should be possible with Bacula. So it sounds part of my problem has been to misunderstand the precise terms used in Bacula. It sounds like I don't want to purge the disk volumes, but to recycle them. So how do I configure this: - A fixed number of disk volumes of a predetermined size which will be recycled when no more space is left? Ideally the recycling in this simple case would be based on a FIFO type principal. If you don't want to have _any_ minimum time limit for volume retention, just set it to one second, which propably is the shortest value you can specify. In theory, this can result in a situation that if your one full backup would consume more space than is designated for backup use, and recycling of the first volume used for that backup would then happen before that backup is finished. But if you prefer this, instead of seeing an error message in this obvious case of malfunctioning, go for it. Seriously, a more reasonable value might be one
Re: [Bacula-users] estimating time remaining on a backup
On Thu, 3 Dec 2009 13:46:02 + Gavin McCullagh gavin.mccull...@gcd.ie wrote: Hi, I started a full backup last night of a tired old Windows-based Dell NAS. It's very slow. The filesystem is full and super-fragmented. I also have compression turned on which makes the cpu work rather hard and slows things down even further. 1.5MB/sec :-( Doesn't that tell you all you need to know? Knowing this rate: 1.5MB/s and the total amount of data in the full backup will tell you the total time, no? -- Alex Chekholko ch...@pcbi.upenn.edu -- Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] 287GB data, 100MB/day, 2 weeks restore. Howto setup
Hi. I have a customer that has 287 GB of data that's needs to be backuped. The change of this data is probably around 100MB per day. The customer wants to be able to restore files 2 weeks back in time. How do I set this up so it requires so little space as possible? I was thinking about using this new Virtual Backup (Vbackup) feature that exist from 3.0 version. One full backup and 13 incremental backups will always exist. When a new incremental backup is added, the oldest incremental is later merged with the full backup by a script same day. Is this possible? It's possible, but while the new vbackup is being synchronised, you will need the space to hold the full backup you are using as the 'base', and the virtual full backup you are building, so the space requirements will be similar to just doing another full backup. 100MB per day isn't much compared to 287GB so I don't know that the virtual full buys you that much. In my setup which has similar requirements, I run a full backup once a week and incremental backups every few hours during the day, and retain the older backups for 15 days. This means I have 2 full backups at any point in time, and 3 backups for a few days while the expired full hasn't been overwritten yet. I just use a permanently attached USB disk to hold all the backups, so space isn't really an issue - disks are cheap so more can be added if required. Also, every night I synthesize a virtual full backup to tape to be taken offsite for DR purposes. If this is a Windows system, then bear in mind that the normal VSS backup of MSSQL Server isn't going to do what you expect when you do an incremental backup, and even less so if you are doing Virtual Full backups. James (btw, USB disks suck these days - the disks are so much faster than USB can handle that it seems like a waste. I'm starting to use eSATA instead when possible) -- Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
[Bacula-users] SOT: Better strategy for backup PostgreSQL DB
Hi there: I'm trying to establishing I'm trying to establish the rules and guidelines to be followed by a Data Center (DC) on topics of backup and restore information. The software that I have proposed to perform these tasks is Bacula[1] of course. This is already configured and backing up some services (SaS) available on DC. However, the issue of Databases with PostgreSQL has caused me concern and have given me the task of finding possible ways to store information (structure contents) of the BD. So far I have investigated two ways of saving the contents: 1. WAL files with Point In Time Recovery (PITR) (the better but more expensive) 2. Make DUMP of the tables from the DB With the first I think is the best, resolve all or nearly all, as the PostgreSQL Manual [2] and this website I found [3] said the advantages are: - The backups not need to be consistent: you need a copy of the files of the cluster (imagine that relates to the content of the directory where the files are stored on the BD) and the WAL files - A DUMP (dump) full BD is not necessary - Incremental - Continuous - Point In Time Recovery: you can restore the DB to a point of time But it also has disadvantages THE FOLLOWING: - Additional Complexity - The need for storage capacity - Improved write and access the hard disk IO which may impact on the performance of the server - Works in the cluster of full BD The second, which is not the best but it's not bad;), I resolved the issue of saving the structure and contents of the BD but you need to consume additional resources every time you perform a backup as it should to dump BD all files then make copies of those files and also not let me do PITR. Taking into account the previously expressed what option yours would recommend taking? When using the first I have a little problem and I do not have enabled the WAL files on my server so the BD file. Wal there, what would be the best strategy to follow then? Generate full dump of the DB so far from that dump and start generating the file. Wal? I find documentation related to the issue of enabling the. Wal? What maximum amount of space needed to be 10 for BD at the moment? Waiting for your comments [1] www.bacula.org [2] http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/continuous-archiving.html [3] http://www.wzdftpd.net/trac/wiki/Misc/PostgreSQL/BackupPITR -- Cheers ReynierPM -- Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] SOT: Better strategy for backup PostgreSQL DB
ReynierPM wrote: Hi there: I'm trying to establishing I'm trying to establish the rules and guidelines to be followed by a Data Center (DC) on topics of backup and restore information. The software that I have proposed to perform these tasks is Bacula[1] of course. This is already configured and backing up some services (SaS) available on DC. However, the issue of Databases with PostgreSQL has caused me concern and have given me the task of finding possible ways to store information (structure contents) of the BD. BD? Is that database (DB)? I will assume it is. So far I have investigated two ways of saving the contents: 1. WAL files with Point In Time Recovery (PITR) (the better but more expensive) 2. Make DUMP of the tables from the DB With the first I think is the best, resolve all or nearly all, as the PostgreSQL Manual [2] and this website I found [3] said the advantages are: - The backups not need to be consistent: you need a copy of the files of the cluster (imagine that relates to the content of the directory where the files are stored on the BD) and the WAL files - A DUMP (dump) full BD is not necessary - Incremental - Continuous - Point In Time Recovery: you can restore the DB to a point of time But it also has disadvantages THE FOLLOWING: - Additional Complexity - The need for storage capacity - Improved write and access the hard disk IO which may impact on the performance of the server - Works in the cluster of full BD The second, which is not the best but it's not bad;), I resolved the issue of saving the structure and contents of the BD but you need to consume additional resources every time you perform a backup as it should to dump BD all files then make copies of those files and also not let me do PITR. Taking into account the previously expressed what option yours would recommend taking? When using the first I have a little problem and I do not have enabled the WAL files on my server so the BD file. Wal there, what would be the best strategy to follow then? Generate full dump of the DB so far from that dump and start generating the file. Wal? I find documentation related to the issue of enabling the. Wal? What maximum amount of space needed to be 10 for BD at the moment? Your choice of PITR or pg_dump pretty much depends upon your time to rebuild the DB. If that takes 20 minutes and you're happy with that, go with pg_dump. Waiting for your comments [1] www.bacula.org [2] http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/continuous-archiving.html [3] http://www.wzdftpd.net/trac/wiki/Misc/PostgreSQL/BackupPITR -- Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Problem Storage File
Everything didnt work. now I install the Serve new and keep my config files. I will tell the result soon to you. Via telnet it was posible to get on the comp. now I changed the name from backuupsrv to backup. Oliver Knittel wrote: Hello Together, I get the folloing message when I ask for the Status of Storage File Fatal error: bsock.c:135 Unable to connect to Storage daemon on backupsrv.ke-si.intern:9103. ERR=Connection refused DNS is correct Sever Name is checkt many times FQN is in hosts too. Password is proofed. When I use telnet i get refused too. Do anybody has got an Idea? Tankx for your help Oli -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Bacula-Problem-Storage-File-tp26657347p26689324.html Sent from the Bacula - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] 287GB data, 100MB/day, 2 weeks restore. Howto setup
Thank you James for that answer. As I expected, 2 full backups seems to be needed to exist to be able to have 2 weeks possibility to restore. But what about this: (F = full, I= incremental. Day 1 to day 13.) F+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I Then merge the oldest incremental with the full one, creating something like this: F+I+F+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I I can then remove the first F+I without loosing my 2 weeks possibility to restore. Is this possible? I have played around with run job= level=VirtualFull and have notice that it always create a full backup last in the chain. Like this F+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I+F. Maybe it exist some parameters so I can control this more? On 12/08/2009 12:12 AM, James Harper wrote: Hi. I have a customer that has 287 GB of data that's needs to be backuped. The change of this data is probably around 100MB per day. The customer wants to be able to restore files 2 weeks back in time. How do I set this up so it requires so little space as possible? I was thinking about using this new Virtual Backup (Vbackup) feature that exist from 3.0 version. One full backup and 13 incremental backups will always exist. When a new incremental backup is added, the oldest incremental is later merged with the full backup by a script same day. Is this possible? It's possible, but while the new vbackup is being synchronised, you will need the space to hold the full backup you are using as the 'base', and the virtual full backup you are building, so the space requirements will be similar to just doing another full backup. 100MB per day isn't much compared to 287GB so I don't know that the virtual full buys you that much. In my setup which has similar requirements, I run a full backup once a week and incremental backups every few hours during the day, and retain the older backups for 15 days. This means I have 2 full backups at any point in time, and 3 backups for a few days while the expired full hasn't been overwritten yet. I just use a permanently attached USB disk to hold all the backups, so space isn't really an issue - disks are cheap so more can be added if required. Also, every night I synthesize a virtual full backup to tape to be taken offsite for DR purposes. If this is a Windows system, then bear in mind that the normal VSS backup of MSSQL Server isn't going to do what you expect when you do an incremental backup, and even less so if you are doing Virtual Full backups. James (btw, USB disks suck these days - the disks are so much faster than USB can handle that it seems like a waste. I'm starting to use eSATA instead when possible) -- Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
