Re: Amanda or Bacula
At 2003-10-14T18:56:45Z, Dan Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If you're running 5.x, you can use dump -L, which will snapshot the > filesystem and back that up. True, but I can't vouch from personal experience whether that works as expected, so I left it out. -- Kirk Strauser pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Amanda or Bacula
In the last episode (Oct 14), Kirk Strauser said: > At 2003-10-14T18:24:10Z, Mike Hogsett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > That can work, but I dont like using tar in place of dump. > > Various sources recommend using tar instead of dump on live > filesystems. The essence of the argument is that dump writes the > filelist at the beginning of the backup, then writes the file > contents. Tar writes a filename, then the contents, then another > filename, then that file's contents, etc. If the filesystem is > inactive then this is a non-issue. If it's quite active, though > (like /var, /home), then tar's system may lead to more consistent > backups. If you're running 5.x, you can use dump -L, which will snapshot the filesystem and back that up. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Amanda or Bacula
At 2003-10-14T17:55:32Z, "Rick Duvall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1. Each filesystem per system to be backed up qualifies as a dumpfile. That's if and only if you use dump instead of tar. I use tar to back up some large filesystems that have large amounts of incompressible video by splitting them into manageable chunks. With Amanda you can choose to use dump or tar on a per-filesystem basis so you have a bit of flexibility when deciding which strategy to use. -- Kirk Strauser "94 outdated ports on the box, 94 outdated ports. Portupgrade one, an hour 'til done, 82 outdated ports on the box." pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Amanda or Bacula
At 2003-10-14T18:24:10Z, Mike Hogsett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That can work, but I dont like using tar in place of dump. Various sources recommend using tar instead of dump on live filesystems. The essence of the argument is that dump writes the filelist at the beginning of the backup, then writes the file contents. Tar writes a filename, then the contents, then another filename, then that file's contents, etc. If the filesystem is inactive then this is a non-issue. If it's quite active, though (like /var, /home), then tar's system may lead to more consistent backups. -- Kirk Strauser "94 outdated ports on the box, 94 outdated ports. Portupgrade one, an hour 'til done, 82 outdated ports on the box." pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Amanda or Bacula
> The AMANDA docs suggest handling this situation by splitting the > partition up into multiple tar dumps; each of which will fit on the > tape. (I'm currently in the process of tweaking my configs to try this > for one of my partitions.) That can work, but I dont like using tar in place of dump. Dump's incremental backup handling is better. I handle this by limiting a maximum size of a partition to no larger than a tape's raw (e.g. uncompressed) capacity. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Amanda or Bacula
--On Tuesday, October 14, 2003 10:55:32 -0700 Rick Duvall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So to clarify just so that I understand correctly: 1. Each filesystem per system to be backed up qualifies as a dumpfile. 2. Multiple dumpfiles per backup 3. Multiple tapes per backup, as long as 1 dumpfile isn't larger than the tape. One of my systems has a 120 gig drive with about 36gigs (and growing) of people's images, documents, etc on it (samba server). My single tape drive is only 20 gigs. I am assuming this will be a problem for Amanda unless I get a bigger tape drive. The AMANDA docs suggest handling this situation by splitting the partition up into multiple tar dumps; each of which will fit on the tape. (I'm currently in the process of tweaking my configs to try this for one of my partitions.) -Pat ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Amanda or Bacula
Yes! For amanda, the tape must be able to store the compressed dump file on one tape. Worst case scenario is that the 120 Gbyte partition is filled with uncompressable data making the dump file 120Gbytes. Amanda will need a tape drive which is capable of storing that on one tape. - Mike > So to clarify just so that I understand correctly: > > 1. Each filesystem per system to be backed up qualifies as a dumpfile. > 2. Multiple dumpfiles per backup > 3. Multiple tapes per backup, as long as 1 dumpfile isn't larger than the > tape. > > One of my systems has a 120 gig drive with about 36gigs (and growing) of > people's images, documents, etc on it (samba server). My single tape drive > is only 20 gigs. I am assuming this will be a problem for Amanda unless I > get a bigger tape drive. > > Sincerely, > > Rick Duvall > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Hogsett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Rick Duvall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 10:23 AM > Subject: Re: Amanda or Bacula > > > > > > > Is this a choice of personal preference, or does one actually work > > > better than the other in my scenario? > > > > I replied earlier to someone else regarding what I do here for backups. > > > > My recommendation is to use amanda. Mostly due to its maturity. Amanda > > can use multiple tapes (via a changer or multiple drives), but a single > > dump file can not span two tapes (this is rarely a problem). > > > > - Michael Hogsett > > > > Below is my response Stephane's question. > > > > > Date:Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:49:22 PDT > > > To: "Stephane Raimbault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > From:Mike Hogsett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: Re: Backup Solutions > > > > > > > I am curious as to what people using FreeBSD use for a Backup > Solution. Are > > > > there any Comercial software available for Tape Backup Solutions that > run wel > > > > l on FreeBSD? > > > > > > > > I'm looking at using a Dell PowerVault 110T LTO tape drive and was > looking fo > > > > r software to utilize to backup the 10 servers and growing in my > server farm. > > > > > > I use amanda (/usr/ports/misc/amanda-*) on a Dual Xeon 2.8 Ghz machine > w/ > > > 2Gbytes of RAM running FreeBSD 4.8. The machine contains a 3ware ATA > RAID > > > card with 6 120Gbyte disks attached and concatinated into a single > volume > > > and is used for temporary holding space for the dump files. The tape > and > > > tape changer device is a Dell PowerEdge 122T with an LTO tape drive > > > connected via an Adaptec SCSI controller. I use `mtx' > > > (/usr/ports/misc/mtx) to control the tape changer. To top it off the > > > machine interfaces to the network using an Intel 1000baseSX ethernet > over > > > fiber network card which is sub-interfaced using VLANs onto all of the > > > subnets in our switch infrastructure (this means backup traffic doesn't > > > hit the router). > > > > > > This machine backs up approximately 200Gbytes per night. This consists > of > > > 157 partitions accross 64 hosts. The hosts are a combination of > Solaris, > > > Linux, FreeBSD, DEC (OFS/1), and AIX machines. I get level zero dumps > of > > > each partition every 4 days and sometimes more frequently. > > > > > > Backups start at 7PM and typically run for about 6 to 8 hours. > > > > > > Hope that helps. > > > > > > - Michael Hogsett > > > > ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Amanda or Bacula
--On Tuesday, October 14, 2003 10:07:18 -0700 Rick Duvall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have about 200 gigs of data to back up every night on multiple machines on the network. All are either FreeBSD or Linux based. My backup machine is FreeBSD. I have about 30 gigs of dump drive space, and a 20 gig tape drive. I am pretty much convinced that even if I use compression, I will need to span across multiple tapes or get a bigger tape drive. At the very least I may have to get more dump drive and do incremental backups. At any rate, I am having a hard time deciding between Amanda and Bacula. Amanda has been around forever and is known to work, but to the best of my knowledge doesn't span across multiple tapes. Bacula, on the other hand, does span across multiple tapes, but it hasn't been out as long. With AMANDA, each filesystem's dump must fit on a single tape; but it can use multiple tapes in a single dump run. I've been using AMANDA for several years now; and one of the things that I like about it is that you tell it how many tapes you have and how long a dump cycle you want; and it decides when to run full or incremental dumps for each partition; and the level of increment on the incrementals. It is easy to set it up to ensure that there are at least two full dumps on tape at any given time; even if you have a very limited number of tapes. I now have a couple of disks that are too large to fit a full dump onto a single tape; so I've been looking into other backup systems. Bacula seems to be the top contender because it appears to be able to span a single partition's dump across multiple tapes. But it uses the classic 'full dump every X, incremental every Y, differential every Z' scheduling mechanism. Which means that I'd need to split my tapes into a set for full dumps and another for incremental or differential dumps. And worry about exactly how many tapes I need in each. And which set I have loaded into the limited-capacity auto-changer. (AMANDA uses the tapes in sequence; so I just swap the 7-tape carrier for the next one when it complains that it can't find the one it wants.) So I'm stuck trying to choose between a system with a real good scheduling algorythm; but unable to backup large partitions; and a system that can handle large partitions; but uses a scheduling scheme that may require me to spend hundreds of dollars for more tapes... -Pat ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Amanda or Bacula
So to clarify just so that I understand correctly: 1. Each filesystem per system to be backed up qualifies as a dumpfile. 2. Multiple dumpfiles per backup 3. Multiple tapes per backup, as long as 1 dumpfile isn't larger than the tape. One of my systems has a 120 gig drive with about 36gigs (and growing) of people's images, documents, etc on it (samba server). My single tape drive is only 20 gigs. I am assuming this will be a problem for Amanda unless I get a bigger tape drive. Sincerely, Rick Duvall - Original Message - From: "Mike Hogsett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Rick Duvall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 10:23 AM Subject: Re: Amanda or Bacula > > > Is this a choice of personal preference, or does one actually work > > better than the other in my scenario? > > I replied earlier to someone else regarding what I do here for backups. > > My recommendation is to use amanda. Mostly due to its maturity. Amanda > can use multiple tapes (via a changer or multiple drives), but a single > dump file can not span two tapes (this is rarely a problem). > > - Michael Hogsett > > Below is my response Stephane's question. > > > Date:Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:49:22 PDT > > To: "Stephane Raimbault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > From:Mike Hogsett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: Backup Solutions > > > > > I am curious as to what people using FreeBSD use for a Backup Solution. Are > > > there any Comercial software available for Tape Backup Solutions that run wel > > > l on FreeBSD? > > > > > > I'm looking at using a Dell PowerVault 110T LTO tape drive and was looking fo > > > r software to utilize to backup the 10 servers and growing in my server farm. > > > > I use amanda (/usr/ports/misc/amanda-*) on a Dual Xeon 2.8 Ghz machine w/ > > 2Gbytes of RAM running FreeBSD 4.8. The machine contains a 3ware ATA RAID > > card with 6 120Gbyte disks attached and concatinated into a single volume > > and is used for temporary holding space for the dump files. The tape and > > tape changer device is a Dell PowerEdge 122T with an LTO tape drive > > connected via an Adaptec SCSI controller. I use `mtx' > > (/usr/ports/misc/mtx) to control the tape changer. To top it off the > > machine interfaces to the network using an Intel 1000baseSX ethernet over > > fiber network card which is sub-interfaced using VLANs onto all of the > > subnets in our switch infrastructure (this means backup traffic doesn't > > hit the router). > > > > This machine backs up approximately 200Gbytes per night. This consists of > > 157 partitions accross 64 hosts. The hosts are a combination of Solaris, > > Linux, FreeBSD, DEC (OFS/1), and AIX machines. I get level zero dumps of > > each partition every 4 days and sometimes more frequently. > > > > Backups start at 7PM and typically run for about 6 to 8 hours. > > > > Hope that helps. > > > > - Michael Hogsett > > ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Amanda or Bacula
Here is my situation: I have about 200 gigs of data to back up every night on multiple machines on the network. All are either FreeBSD or Linux based. My backup machine is FreeBSD. I have about 30 gigs of dump drive space, and a 20 gig tape drive. I am pretty much convinced that even if I use compression, I will need to span across multiple tapes or get a bigger tape drive. At the very least I may have to get more dump drive and do incremental backups. At any rate, I am having a hard time deciding between Amanda and Bacula. Amanda has been around forever and is known to work, but to the best of my knowledge doesn't span across multiple tapes. Bacula, on the other hand, does span across multiple tapes, but it hasn't been out as long. Is this a choice of personal preference, or does one actually work better than the other in my scenario? Sincerely, Rick Duvall Online Highways System Administrator (541) 997-8401 x 111 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
