Chris,

For the longest time I did traditional backups (fulls and incrementals,
via tar).  If that model still fits your needs, you can stay with that.

Once I began backing up a small cluster of machines, Amanda's paradigm
began to show its value.  However, it relies upon volume management, and
it requires an acceptance that "her" algorithms allow a more optimal
distribution of backups based on both availability of backup media
(virtual or otherwise) and the amount of individual and collective
changes on the client machines - as well as certain parameters I set
such as the maximum interval I am willing to accept between full
backups.  The benefit is that with the amount of space I've allocated to
vtapes, I get the maximum amount of change data on backup.  It isn't
overprovisioning; it's about optimization.  It's also proven itself in
restores, where instead of having to restore a full directory and then
every L1 and L2 delta, I can simply tell Amanda to restore
file-version-as-of-specific-date.

I highly suggest a read of this FAQ:
http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/FAQ:How_are_backup_levels_defined_and_how_does_Amanda_use_them%3F;
particularly the section about Amanda's planning strategy.  If you
"insist" on constraining Amanda to one-volume-per-backup, you are
basically going against the strategy; without that capability, I don't
think that Amanda's overhead gives you anything you can't do with tar
and a cron job.


On 2017-12-31 07:13 PM, Chris Miller wrote:
> Hi Winston,
>
>     Could you explain your concern about multiple volumes?
>
> Yes. It adds a layer between the catalog of backed-up files and the
> location on disk. Without tape volumes, I could presumably find what I
> need with a date and tar, with tape volumes, I have the additional
> complexity of unpacking the tape volume discipline. If I could
> configure tape volumes so that each volume held exactly one backup,
> then I could live with that compromise.
>
> Is there any documentation that I haven't found, because I haven't
> found much...
>
> Thanks for the help,
> -- 
> Chris.
>
> V:916.974.0424
> F:916.974.0428


Reply via email to