Hi,

21.11.2007 14:07,, Shon Stephens wrote::
> Ok. This is a rant and you can remove it from the list if you want to
> later. I just have to vent.

I don't think your mail will be removed as that's rather difficult 
with a mailing list :-)

> Bacula is incredibly complex to setup. Its taken 4 months and its
> still not working correctly.

Now that's astonishing... four months after my initial contact with 
Bacula I had a number of customer setups running, using disks and tapes.

> Things that should be easy that Bacula makes overly complex:
> 
> Labeling tapes
> Assigning tapes to pools
> Reassigning tapes to pools
> Managing disk media

I really don't understand where that is overly complex. Doing all this 
is only one line in bconsole, beyond what you set up in the 
configuration. Even the configuration of a pool usually needs less 
than ten lines of text.

> Things Bacula can't seem to get right:
> 
> Detecting a tape is in the drive and using it
> Even though the correctly labeled tape is in the drive, and has the
> right Volume label, and is marked "Append", and is from the correct
> Pool....
> Bacula is still waiting for a mount request. Every external program
> recognizes that the tape is in the drive and mounted. Not Bacula

Hard to comment on - the one issue we discussed wasn't really 
resolved, but that's something I can't exactly reproduce. My customers 
system, where I encountered that, works correctly with 2.2.5.

> Catalog entries. I've not had a single backup job where the right
> entries made it into the Catalog

I can't reproduce that.

> Windows hosts. Good luck figuring out the esoteric path syntax because
> its different in different chapters of the manual and also different
> depending on which part of the config you are editing

Examples, perhaps even suggestions how to improve that?

> Basically I can't see that its useable for anything more than backing
> up a single system, and even then better be careful.

I can confirm that many users, even really big ones, can rely on 
Bacula for their backups.

> I'm going with Arkeia Network Backup. Might cost money, but at least
> it will work as advertised which is more than can be said for Crapula

Good luck with Arkeia. I found it to be extremely unreliable, for 
example with its license assignments. I never got a whole set of 
backups to complete correctly - something always got stuck, crashed, 
had to be re-configured, or something. Admittedly, that's some time 
ago, but then I switched to Bacula...

Arno

-- 
Arno Lehmann
IT-Service Lehmann
www.its-lehmann.de

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Reply via email to