NFS and NDMP are the fastest ways to backup just be sure to set the read and write size on your nfs mounts to 8192 as the default 1024 is just a bottle neck for performance. If you plan on doing backups to tape I recommend you use something that maintains a database of your data/files restores get real ugly without it. Also tape libraries are really important with the size of hard drives now.
-----Original Message----- From: Williams, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:44 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: rcp, nfs or ftp? Essentially, I'm trying to figure out which way would be best as a standard... I do have some older production machines that I'm not sure will run a current version of ssh... (Not sure on that one, I'll have to check) Often I'll have to bring up nodes that are some what identical to other nodes and one of the processes is to backup certain files using an automated process to push the files to a backup server. (This is where my question comes into play) I want something that can be easy to bring up a node without too much human error and doesn't bring down the server... One thing I did find out and maybe someone can give me some insight to this one. Once when trying rcp and having lots of nodes go to one server to push their files, after a few minutes inetd reported that too many connections where encountered and it shutdown for about 5 minutes due to a denial of service attack. This is an issue that I want to make sure I don't run into. I think that I might have ran into this one with ftp also... Does scp have this limitation since it's not under inetd? With nfs I constantly see errors in the messages file about nfs server not responding and then immediately it says it found the nfs server. To me this sounds like broadcast traffic... Right now, we have many scripts that utilize all four methods if you include scp. I'm just trying to get things more in sync and try to use one method that would be best. Thanks for all the input! Jeff Williams -----Original Message----- From: David Talkington [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 6:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: rcp, nfs or ftp? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Williams, Jeff wrote: >I'm trying to figure out from a bandwidth, system utilization and security >standpoint which transfer protocol is better... (ie. pros and cons) > >Is there a significant difference between the three? I'm automating certain >things and trying to figure out which is better in transfering files? There are more important considerations than speed. If you're transferring files between two machines with an internet connection, they all stink. Paint us a picture of your needs, topology, and expectations? - -d - -- David Talkington PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/0xCA4C11AD.pgp - -- http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/pale_blue_dot.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6 iQA/AwUBPHRIzb9BpdPKTBGtEQJQ9QCfc6Ft3XX5PjqCHL1xUrCO17OD4iMAoIm6 UPKIw3tV9zD97yfwZ1Z/ffvV =9pCA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
