On May 7, 2015 6:05 AM, "Jussi Hirvi" <greenspot at greenspot.fi> wrote:> > I wonder why nobody has yet mentioned rdiff-backup. It combines browsabledirectories with multiple versions - the version data is stored in a separate rdiff-backup-data subdirectory (one per backup task).> > One downside is that rdiff-backup causes a lot of network traffic. Forthat reason I currently use rsync to copy over network, and then I use rdiff-backup locally to create a repository with multiple versions.> > Another system that we use is rdiffweb. It uses rdiff-backup over networkand adds a web interface for clients to browse and restore files or directories. I did not personally set it up, but it seems to work fine. I am one of the people who use rsync with hardlinks. Reason is very simple and even humble: I built my home backup server around a OpenWrt - Seagate dockstar if you want to date that - box and an external backup drive. So I wanted something low resources that did not require me to install any packages. That script grew a bit (or a lot) and became my old job's backup code. But, I admit one think it does miss is having a convenient way to look for a file, specially if you physically rotate drives. If rdiff-backup will tell when was the last time a file has been backed up/touched even if drive with said file is not mounted, I will need to get to learn more about it.> > - Jussi > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 7.5.2015 14.24, Mauricio Tavares wrote:> I admit one think it does miss is having a convenient way to look for > a file, specially if you physically rotate drives. If rdiff-backup > will tell when was the last time a file has been backed up/touched > even if drive with said file is not mounted, I will need to get to > learn more about it.I don't think rdiff-backup would work with rotated drives - not really. You could make it work to some extent with some cumbersome gimmicks, but not perfectly. I found this thread on the subject: http://www.backupcentral.com/phpBB2/two-way-mirrors-of-external-mailing-lists-3/rdiff-backup-23/rdiff-backup-and-rotated-external-drives-122523/ But why rotate drives? Big drives are not very expensive nowadays. Regards, Jussi
--On Thursday, May 07, 2015 06:41:03 PM +0300 Jussi Hirvi <greenspot at greenspot.fi> wrote:> But why rotate drives? Big drives are not very expensive nowadays.1. Redundant copies. 2. Sometimes your filesystems are larger than the largest drives. For example, I'm currently seting up backups for a 24TB filesystem where a network-based DR is not feasible (the average rate of churn exceeds the available network bandwidth). Good luck trying to find drives that big. I had a sense of deja vu the other day; I was taken back to the time when I first ran into a filesystem that was larger than the size of a backup tape and the software I was using at the time (Amanda) had the assumption that a single filesystem was smaller than a single tape. (I understand they fixed that assumption shortly thereafter, but I had already moved on to another product.) For the record, my favourite product is Bacula. Devin