On 10/9/10 10:39 AM, Xuo wrote: > > > Le 06/10/2010 15:04, Michael Stowe a écrit : >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to backup some laptop computers (for my personal needs). >>> For the moment, I automount the shared directories of the Windows 7 PC >>> on my Linux backuppc server. This works fine but the problem is that >>> some backups are not performed when the laptop is shut down. The backups >>> start because the Linux server is running but the mount point is down. >>> I would like to know what are the advantages/drawbacks for laptop pcs of >>> the following policies : >>> >>> * automount of shared directories + rsync (what I do now). >>> * smb + tar >>> * rsyncd >>> * Other ? >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> Xuo. >> Well, if the laptop's down, none of these methods will help you back it >> up, obviously, but here's a brief outline of the pros and cons: >> >> * automount of shared directories + rsync (what I do now). >> Probably the least bandwidth-efficient, since rsync has to read every file >> over the mount. Can't handle open files. >> * smb >> Requires the least amount of software on the client. Uses timestamp for >> incrementals, so can miss copied files and renamed directories during >> incrementals. Can't handle open files. >> * automount of shared directories + tar >> All the disadvantages of mounting plus all the disadvantages of tar >> * rsyncd/rsync >> Can be bandwidth efficient and seamless, there are scripts publicly >> available that can handle open files. Within this category, the >> variations of ssh/rsyncd, rsyncd, winexe/rsync have varying degrees of >> speed, ease of deployment, and encryption. I use the winexe/rsync method >> since we have no need of encryption, so we prioritize speed and ease of >> deployment. > Hi, > > Thank you for your answer and sorry for the delay in response. > > * Point 1 : you say rsync has to read all files over the mount, but I > think > it is more or less the same for all methods.
If you run rsync over the network instead of locally over a network mount, only the differences are transferred. The rsync instances at each end only exchange block checksums to identify already-matching content. On a fast LAN, the difference may not matter. > * Point 4 : it seems to be the most widely used but it needs so > executables > on all clients. This is a big disadvantage. Yes, there are some tradeoffs. You could also use smb as the xfer method - with the disadvantage of missing new files with old timestamps in incrementals. > * One point you did not mentioned and I considered as important (if I > understand the way backupPC works). > o In case of automounts, the mount point is considered as a local > directory. If the laptop PC is shutdown, then the directory is > considered empty and the backup ends normally. There is no more > backup till the next usual one. You could use a DumpPreUserCmd or DumpPreShareCmd action to check for something below the mount point and set UserCmdCheckStatus to fail the backup so retries will happen. > o If backups are done with smb, then, if the laptop is shutdown, the > backup fails and it will be scheduled for the next time (for ex, > one > hour later). This is a major advantage of smb vs automount. > o With rsync/rsyncd, I don't know what the behavior is. Rsync/rsyncd will fail if the connection fails. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/