This point is very important. You will have to do the equivalent of
exporting to the server with "root" enabled. In Unix this usually is an
option like "root=X" or on Linux "no_root_squash" otherwise you may not
have sufficient priviledges to read the files. It may look like the
backups worked, but when you restore the files, you may find that the
files are the right size but only contain null characters (aka. ^@ or
ASCII 0). It all depends how the MS NFS implementation handles UID
mapping and what happens when you have insufficient priviledges to
access some file. If you choose to use this NFS arrangement, you should
make sure to export the disk read-only, otherwise someone could use NFS
to trash your NT server(s). You should also try restoring a backup to a
different location, eg. the holding disk, and make sure the file
contents are OK and not bogus ^@ files.
"John R. Jackson" wrote:
> >... I lean towards NFS, is there any reason I should not?
>
> I know very little about this, but the one thing that popped to mind is
> whether an MS NFS server would give a tar running as root on a client (to
> NFS) enough access to get to everything. The normal action is to convert
> all root requests to "nobody", which will not work well for backups.
--
"Jonathan F. Dill" ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
