Re: [BackupPC-users] Download file directly from browse fails...

[Mirco Piccin]

Hi and thanks for replies.

> If you have never successfully restored that file, how can you be
> certain that it's not corrupt in some way?

I'm sure backup works because i've already restore that file via smb
on original host.

>>  Well, the restore must be done by a Windows user.
> OK, why not use the same method that backed the file up to restore it?

Well, i must restore that file in another machine, that is not in
BackupPC hosts list.

> Many versions of apache do not support large files even when the rest of
> the OS and file systems support them, so there may be a 4 gig limit on
> the server side.

That could be possible...

But i've try right now with a DVD file .iso (4.4 GB).
It works without problem.

So, apache2 is not the problem.

Maybe apache2 + backuppc de/compression of that file could be the problem.
Any other tips?

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
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/

Re: [BackupPC-users] Download file directly from browse fails...

[Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)]

Mirco Piccin wrote:

> Any other tips?

Creating the archive locally on the server (using BackupPC_tarCreate  
or BackupPC_zipCreate) and then transferring it to the Windows machine  
is not an option?

Nils Breunese.

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
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/

Re: [BackupPC-users] Download file directly from browse fails...

[Mirco Piccin]

Hi.

> Creating the archive locally on the server (using BackupPC_tarCreate
> or BackupPC_zipCreate) and then transferring it to the Windows machine
> is not an option?

Yes, it is an option.
But I'm thinking to an option that not require the console .
Not all the BackupPC user are *nix "expert".

I'm thinking for example to a procedure (that a user can call with a
button on the CGI interface) that create the zip and make it available
in a http (not backuppc) folder :
maybe restore the file in a BackupPC localhost folder Samba shared  or
http accessible - but here there will be problems about temporary user
access.

I'd like to solve that problem without add user host in BackupPC and
without use console.
Is it possible?

Regards
M

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
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/

Re: [BackupPC-users] Download file directly from browse fails...

[Jim McNamara]

On Feb 17, 2008 8:42 AM, Mirco Piccin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi.
>
> > Creating the archive locally on the server (using BackupPC_tarCreate
> > or BackupPC_zipCreate) and then transferring it to the Windows machine
> > is not an option?
>
> Yes, it is an option.
> But I'm thinking to an option that not require the console .
> Not all the BackupPC user are *nix "expert".


That seems to be the root of your problem. You certainly do need to be a
wizard at shell scripting to run BackupPC, but being unable/unwilling to use
the CLI on your server won't work.

>
>
> I'm thinking for example to a procedure (that a user can call with a
> button on the CGI interface) that create the zip and make it available
> in a http (not backuppc) folder :


There's no way for that to work. Most installations have BackupPC run as
user backuppc, sometimes of group backuppc, and sometimes as group www-data,
or whatever the apache group is. User backuppc will not have rights to
"write" in any apache controlled directory, save its own. That would require
at least some operations being performed as root, which will require human
intervention, or a script created for that purpose.

>
> maybe restore the file in a BackupPC localhost folder Samba shared  or
> http accessible - but here there will be problems about temporary user
> access.


You also would have the same problem here. BackupPC alone cannot do this, as
user backuppc cannot write to your samba shared directory.  Again, a script
from you or direct human interaction with the CLI would have to happen.


>
> I'd like to solve that problem without add user host in BackupPC and
> without use console.
> Is it possible?


Very dubious. The simplest solution has already been posted Nils Breunese
from the very beginning of this thread. Use BackupPC_zipCreate or
BackupPC_tarCreate, and then move that file into the samba share directory
or a apache directory yourself.
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/___
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/

[BackupPC-users] mysqlfs info and thoughts

[dan]

for those who were interested in using a mysql database as a filesystem for
backuppc, this is possible with the fuse mysqlfs.

seems to be a promising project to allow un-altered backuppc installs to use
mysql.

currently, some things take 10 times as long as a native filesystem which is
a direct result of the fuse module not being mature or tuned but many this
take less time even though unoptimized fuse can be slow, such as file and
directory creation and deletion which is a testament to how much faster
mysql is than a regular filesystem.  even afer optimisation i suspect that
large file writes will still be some multiple slower on mysqlfs than a
regular filesystem as mysql is not great at storing large chunks of data
and/or splitting up the data into more manageable chucks has overheade.

advantages:
BIG - mysql caching!
take advantage of small transaction efficiency of mysql
remote mounting of filesystem database, potential to create client side
mysql connector for easier remote backups
syncronous mounting of database so 2 machines can access same filesystem at
same time.
BIG - online remote replication

disadvantages:
fuse is slow when unoptimized
very slow now for large files, probably never get up to even 1/2 regular
filesystem performance for large files
need to run another service on backuppc server(mysql) which means more
resources.

unknowns:
not a good idea to compress disk that mysql database sits on and mysql
compression modules may not compress as well, would be nice to not use
backuppc compression and let 'filesystem' handle it as it would be nicer for
users.
future of the mysqlfs project!
potential of bad fuse code bringing down the system
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/___
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/

Re: [BackupPC-users] My thoughts on building an inexpensive backuppc server.

[Nicholas Mistry]

Justin,

To be honest, i am open to any type of solution for the hardware  
platform, but i do not want to venture into recycling older  
hardware.If the system was only intended for my personal use, i  
definitely would have used one of my old Dell servers w/ an ESATA card  
with a bunch of external drives in a frankenstein configuration that  
was hidden in my basement.   Unfortunately my friends / family /  
clients generally cringe at the thought of relying on something that  
is "old".I find that people are much more comfortable to purchase  
the required hardware and have me come over and assemble it, as long  
as i stay within the budget.


Its a good suggestion, but just not exactly what i am looking to do..

thanks for your feedback..

-N

On Feb 11, 2008, at 9:51 PM, Justin Best wrote:

Well, my first concern would be that the board you selected doesn't  
seem to have great Linux support. See one of the reviews at http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121326


Why not just buy a used machine, or better still, re-use one you've  
already got? All my BackupPC servers are old, re-used hardware, and  
they work great. And, if you get a machine that is well known  
(example: PowerEdge 400SC) you'll be able to google for help if you  
have weird issues with the OS.


On Feb 11, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Nicholas Mistry wrote:

For the past couple years I have been constantly researching for a  
way to create an inexpensive backup server that gives at least 1TB  
in full RAID 1 redundancy while keeping $/GB as low as possible.  I  
am targeting this deployment for something that i would use in a  
home or small business where the users could help themselves to  
restoring files (which backuppc does well) and could assist with  
offsite rotations by using additional external USB drives.I  
have tried this w/ other low power small form factor machines but  
in the past i found that they did not have enough driver support or  
bus speed to keep up at an acceptable rate.


Recently, i came across an article on the web where someone created  
a $200 pc... Using this article as a starting point I think that i  
am getting closer to what i want to do:



Starting with the hardware he suggests in the article, I plan to  
substitute his drives for larger drives in a software RAID1  
configuration we have:


Intel BLKD201GLY2 Motherboard + CPU - $70
1GB Kingston Value Ram - @20
APEX MI-100 Case w/ power supply - $56 (or any case that holds 2  
drives).

Two (2) WD 1TB drives.. WD10EACS -- $240each, $480.
Install your favorite flavor of linux with backuppc (CentOS,  
Fedora, Ubuntu, Debian) but install a stripped down version w/o the  
gui and the like.


Adding up the $ before tax and shipping yeilds: $626  or roughly  
$0.62 / GB in RAID 1 using linux software raid or LVM.


Some other thoughts:
I am aware that this is not going to be the fastest box out there,  
but you already know that is not what i am going for.
Possibly add an inexpensive PCI Gigabit Card for faster transfer  
speeds.
or add a Raid Card to support 5+ drives in a RAID 6 setup to  
increase storage to 4TB+ (w/ a bigger case)
Im not a fan of WD hard drives as i have had many fail on me... But  
these happened to be the best bang for the buck at the time of  
writing this email.  I would probably spend a bit more on drives I  
know that would last longer.


I am curious if anyone had some ideas , feedback, or has tried to  
create something similar. If i try this i will post some info  
on my findings in terms of performance and my total experience with  
setting this type of system up.


Thanks in advance.

-N

ps:  My benchmark is a P2-450 w/ 512MB RAM and 3x500GB SATA drives  
in a software RAID 5 config running under debian.  Backuppc runs  
quite well on this machine and backs up 4 linux servers  and 2  
windows servers in less than 8 hours at night.  There is probably  
3TB of data total across all the machines, and after compression  
and pooling it comes to around 5-600GB).  This system has been rock  
solid and has been in production for quite some time now.   I run  
rsyncd on the linux boxes and use SMB for the windows servers. 
This machine is only part of my total backup plan.  It exists to  
provide users the ability to restore files on their own, or if they  
need to pull an older revision.

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/___
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/




-

Re: [BackupPC-users] My thoughts on building an inexpensive backuppc server.

[Nicholas Mistry]

On Feb 12, 2008, at 10:29 AM, dan wrote:


for instance $200
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=04&kc=6W300&l=en&oc=bsdwd2a&s=bsd&dgc=BF&cid=7420&lid=197374



Dan, the link did not resolve for me. Can you let me know what config  
you used?



make a shell script to add that mirror to your RAID1 and let it  
sync, then fail the drive and unmount it and notify you via email or  
something.  put that script into the hotplug actions so that when  
the USB drive with the externals ID is hotplugged, run the script.   
then you just plug the drive in and let it run and wait for the  
email that says its done.


Great suggestion... Have you tried this personally?   Do you have a  
script that accomplishes this?


-N-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/___
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/

Re: [BackupPC-users] My thoughts on building an inexpensive backuppc server.

[Nicholas Mistry]

On Feb 14, 2008, at 3:12 PM, David Morton wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> On Feb 11, 2008, at 9:18 PM, Nicholas Mistry wrote:
>
>> For the past couple years I have been constantly researching for a  
>> way to create an inexpensive backup server that gives at least 1TB  
>> in full RAID 1 redundancy while keeping $/GB as low as possible.  I  
>> am targeting this deployment for something that i would use in a  
>> home or small business where the users could help themselves to  
>> restoring files (which backuppc does well) and could assist with  
>> offsite rotations by using additional external USB drives.I  
>> have tried this w/ other low power small form factor machines but  
>> in the past i found that they did not have enough driver support or  
>> bus speed to keep up at an acceptable rate.
>
> I just recently did this, for my own home network and then for a  
> couple of others.  I came out just a little under $700 for 1.5 TB of  
> RAID 5 storage.  I wrote up a little bit on slashdot:  
> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=367261&cid=21435931


David, I took a look at your post on slashdot, but did not see what  
motherboard and case you used.  Would you mind sharing these details..

Thanks

-N


-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
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/

Re: [BackupPC-users] My thoughts on building an inexpensive backuppc server.

[Nicholas Mistry]

On Feb 15, 2008, at 9:47 AM, Mirco Piccin wrote:

> Hi.
>
>>> For the past couple years I have been constantly researching for a
>>> way to create an inexpensive backup server that gives at least 1TB
>>> in full RAID 1 redundancy while keeping $/GB as low as possible.
>
> Also i've done something that.
> I use a :
> - jetway motherboard J7F4K1G5D (1500 mhz, dual gigabit lan, dual sata
> channel, low consumption);
> - ram 1gb;
> - disk on module 1gb (for the OS - debian etch + backuppc);
> - controller sata with 4 additional sata port;
> - 4 hd barracuda 500gb sata2 (raid1, for backup data);
>
> It Works like a charm.
> I choose to use also a low noise psu + thermaltake case, but those are
> clearly not important.
> Without case and psu, the total price was very low (the 500 gb sata hd
> were in special sale :-D).


Mirco, Thanks for the suggestion of the jetway motherboard.  This  
pretty close to what i am looking for.   The addition of the DOM (Disk  
on Module) really makes this an ideal solution.

How is the performance of the Via C7 chip and the dual Gigabit?How  
have you configured the two gigabit ports?  Did you pair them?

Could you also share how you setup the DOM.  I am curious to find out  
what you did for a swap partition (if you even used one at all).

Lastly what case /  power supply  did you end up sticking all this  
stuff in?
thanks
-N

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
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/