[BackupPC-users] Backing Us an NSS volume on OES2
Hi All, I am wanting to run a backuppc server that will backup all of our servers including some that run SLES with OES that have NSS volumes. Is this possible and what distro would be best to run the backuppc server? TIA, Paul -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] Backing Us an NSS volume on OES2
You can use any distro of your choice. Just download the package from sf.net and fire away. -- Thanks and Regards, Anand Gupta -Original Message- From: Paul Hennion p...@bhs.org.za Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:59:45 To: backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [BackupPC-users] Backing Us an NSS volume on OES2 Hi All, I am wanting to run a backuppc server that will backup all of our servers including some that run SLES with OES that have NSS volumes. Is this possible and what distro would be best to run the backuppc server? TIA, Paul -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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/ -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] Backing Us an NSS volume on OES2
Um, yes, but what about sharing the nss volumes? how does one authenticate? -P On 10 Jun 2009 at 9:39, anand...@gmail.com wrote: You can use any distro of your choice. Just download the package from sf.net and fire away. -- Thanks and Regards, Anand Gupta -Original Message- From: Paul Hennion p...@bhs.org.za Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:59:45 To: backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [BackupPC-users] Backing Us an NSS volume on OES2 Hi All, I am wanting to run a backuppc server that will backup all of our servers including some that run SLES with OES that have NSS volumes. Is this possible and what distro would be best to run the backuppc server? TIA, Paul -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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/ -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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/ -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] backups not working - backupdisable picking up incorrectly
On Jun 09, Les Mikesell wrote: The usual reason for backups stopping is that your disk space is nearly full but the error message makes this look like some other problem. There's well over 600 gigs available on the current storage pool so I don't think this is the issue. I've just gone through and checked all settings from the GUI aswell and there's nothing in place saying backups should be disabled at all. How does backuppc decide when there is not enough disk space to consider performing backups? Regards, - Steve -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] SOLVED: backups not working - backupdisable picking up config incorrectly
Solved: For reference if anyone else has this problem, it seems that at some point (presumably to stop backups) someone has changed the FullPeriod option to -1, which upon reading the comments in greater detail seems to disable backups from running. Having changed this to a positive value - I can now get backups running. Thanks for the pointers. Regards, - Steve -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] Backing Us an NSS volume on OES2
Sorry not sure on that, but i am sure some one on the mailing list knows and will reply to you. Thanks and Regards, Anand Gupta Original Message Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] Backing Us an NSS volume on OES2 From: Paul Hennion p...@bhs.org.za To: anand...@gmail.com, General list for user discussion, questions and support backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Wed Jun 10 15:28:12 2009 Um, yes, but what about sharing the nss volumes? how does one authenticate? -P On 10 Jun 2009 at 9:39, anand...@gmail.com wrote: You can use any distro of your choice. Just download the package from sf.net and fire away. -- Thanks and Regards, Anand Gupta -Original Message- From: Paul Hennionp...@bhs.org.za Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:59:45 To:backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [BackupPC-users] Backing Us an NSS volume on OES2 Hi All, I am wanting to run a backuppc server that will backup all of our servers including some that run SLES with OES that have NSS volumes. Is this possible and what distro would be best to run the backuppc server? TIA, Paul -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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/ -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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/ -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ 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] backups not working - backupdisable picking up incorrectly
Steve Redmond wrote:
On Jun 09, Les Mikesell wrote:
The usual reason for backups stopping is that your disk space is nearly
full but the error message makes this look like some other problem.
There's well over 600 gigs available on the current storage pool so I
don't think this is the issue. I've just gone through and checked all
settings from the GUI aswell and there's nothing in place saying backups
should be disabled at all.
How does backuppc decide when there is not enough disk space to consider
performing backups?
It looks at the percentage used: $Conf{DfMaxUsagePct} = 95;
But the symptoms would be different than yours - this just stops the
scheduled runs but you can still start them through the web interface.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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] Clusters of hosts
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:16:33PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:
I don't know how common this usage is, but in our setup we have a lot of
backuppc hosts that are physically located on a few machines only. It
would be nice if it were possible to allow hosts on different machines to
be backupped simultaneously, but prevent simultaneous backups(dumps) of
hosts on the same machine.
Any thoughts?
If you have a way of mapping the host names to a physical machine, you
can use my queing/locking strategy described in:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg13698.html
Create one queue/semaphore per physical machine and have the
$Conf{DumpPreUserCmd} command exit with an error if it can't get a
slot/lock (also you will have to set $Conf{UserCmdCheckStatus} = 1;).
--
-- rouilj
John Rouillard System Administrator
Renesys Corporation 603-244-9084 (cell) 603-643-9300 x 111
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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] Upgrading from etch to lenny
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Ward... James Ward jew...@torzo.com wrote: I have two etch BackupPC servers and two lenny BackupPC servers. All were built at the OS level currently running. I like the new BackupPC interface a lot and would like to upgrade the etch servers to lenny and therefore BackupPC. How smoothly is this likely to go? Any HOWTOs or READMEs or gotchas I can study beforehand? Thanks, James I've had backuppc running on Debian boxes since sarge. Upgrading the OS never caused a problem for me. My hosts tend to backup single digit machine on LANs, but I haven't even seen a hiccup from doing the dist-upgrades. -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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/ -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ 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] Clusters of hosts
John Rouillard wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:16:33PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:
I don't know how common this usage is, but in our setup we have a lot of
backuppc hosts that are physically located on a few machines only. It
would be nice if it were possible to allow hosts on different machines to
be backupped simultaneously, but prevent simultaneous backups(dumps) of
hosts on the same machine.
Any thoughts?
If you have a way of mapping the host names to a physical machine, you
can use my queing/locking strategy described in:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg13698.html
Create one queue/semaphore per physical machine and have the
$Conf{DumpPreUserCmd} command exit with an error if it can't get a
slot/lock (also you will have to set $Conf{UserCmdCheckStatus} = 1;).
As a feature request, I think it would be nice to have a way to add
hosts to groups, then limit how many in each group the scheduler would
start at once. There are several scenarios where this is needed to
avoid overloading some common reasource - like a low-bandwidth link as
well as sharing a physical host or filesystem.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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] Upgrading from etch to lenny
Have you specifically done a dist-upgrade from etch to lenny? On Jun 10, 2009, at 8:14 AM, Jim McNamara wrote: On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Ward... James Ward jew...@torzo.com wrote: I have two etch BackupPC servers and two lenny BackupPC servers. All were built at the OS level currently running. I like the new BackupPC interface a lot and would like to upgrade the etch servers to lenny and therefore BackupPC. How smoothly is this likely to go? Any HOWTOs or READMEs or gotchas I can study beforehand? Thanks, James I've had backuppc running on Debian boxes since sarge. Upgrading the OS never caused a problem for me. My hosts tend to backup single digit machine on LANs, but I haven't even seen a hiccup from doing the dist-upgrades. -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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/ -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ 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/ Ward... James Ward Tekco Management Group, LLC jew...@torzo.com 520-290-0190x268 ICQ: 201663408 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ 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] Clusters of hosts
Les Mikesell wrote at about 10:23:10 -0500 on Wednesday, June 10, 2009:
John Rouillard wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:16:33PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:
I don't know how common this usage is, but in our setup we have a lot of
backuppc hosts that are physically located on a few machines only. It
would be nice if it were possible to allow hosts on different machines to
be backupped simultaneously, but prevent simultaneous backups(dumps) of
hosts on the same machine.
Any thoughts?
If you have a way of mapping the host names to a physical machine, you
can use my queing/locking strategy described in:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg13698.html
Create one queue/semaphore per physical machine and have the
$Conf{DumpPreUserCmd} command exit with an error if it can't get a
slot/lock (also you will have to set $Conf{UserCmdCheckStatus} = 1;).
As a feature request, I think it would be nice to have a way to add
hosts to groups, then limit how many in each group the scheduler would
start at once. There are several scenarios where this is needed to
avoid overloading some common reasource - like a low-bandwidth link as
well as sharing a physical host or filesystem.
I think the notion of host groups is a good idea. Even more generally,
it would be nice to be able to define config files at the group level
rather than the current choice between the default config.pl file and
host-specific config files.
For example, this would allow one to define a config file for Linux
vs. Windows machines or for desktops vs. notebooks or for critical
machines vs. less critical machines (I know you can currently do this
in a kludgey fashion using links or by adding perl code to the config
file but it would be nice to have a better way to do it).
This generalization of host groups could easily include the notion of
maximum simultaneous group backups to run.
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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] Upgrading from etch to lenny
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Ward... James Ward jew...@torzo.comwrote: Have you specifically done a dist-upgrade from etch to lenny? On Jun 10, 2009, at 8:14 AM, Jim McNamara wrote: On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Ward... James Ward jew...@torzo.comwrote: I have two etch BackupPC servers and two lenny BackupPC servers. All were built at the OS level currently running. I like the new BackupPC interface a lot and would like to upgrade the etch servers to lenny and therefore BackupPC. How smoothly is this likely to go? Any HOWTOs or READMEs or gotchas I can study beforehand? Thanks, James I've had backuppc running on Debian boxes since sarge. Upgrading the OS never caused a problem for me. My hosts tend to backup single digit machine on LANs, but I haven't even seen a hiccup from doing the dist-upgrades. -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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/ -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ 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/ Ward... James Ward Tekco Management Group, LLC jew...@torzo.com 520-290-0190x268 ICQ: 201663408 -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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/ Yes, I did upgrade from Etch to Lenny on over 20 machines running backuppc, none of them had any issues. By the way, top posting (writing above the previous post) is frowned upon by most mailing lists. Most mail programs handle it well, but people trying to read the thread via archives or on older software have trouble when someone writes above the older text. -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ 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] Upgrading from etch to lenny
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 01:30:35PM -0400, Jim McNamara wrote: Have you specifically done a dist-upgrade from etch to lenny? [...90 lines snipped...] By the way, top posting (writing above the previous post) is frowned upon by most mailing lists. Most mail programs handle it well, but people trying to read the thread via archives or on older software have trouble when someone writes above the older text. Full-quoting is about the same league. SCNR, Tino. -- What we nourish flourishes. - Was wir nähren erblüht. www.lichtkreis-chemnitz.de www.craniosacralzentrum.de -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] Clusters of hosts
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:38:30AM -0400, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote: Les Mikesell wrote at about 10:23:10 -0500 on Wednesday, June 10, 2009: John Rouillard wrote: On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:16:33PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote: I don't know how common this usage is, but in our setup we have a lot of backuppc hosts that are physically located on a few machines only. It would be nice if it were possible to allow hosts on different machines to be backupped simultaneously, but prevent simultaneous backups(dumps) of hosts on the same machine. If you have a way of mapping the host names to a physical machine, you can use my queing/locking strategy described in: http://www.mail-archive.com/backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg13698.html As a feature request, I think it would be nice to have a way to add hosts to groups, then limit how many in each group the scheduler would start at once. There are several scenarios where this is needed to avoid overloading some common reasource - like a low-bandwidth link as well as sharing a physical host or filesystem. I think the notion of host groups is a good idea. Even more generally, it would be nice to be able to define config files at the group level rather than the current choice between the default config.pl file and host-specific config files. I agree with both group definitions, but the hosts should be able to participate in multiple groups. The groups used to define what gets backed up and the group that defines how the schedule of backups occurs should be able to be different. E.G. if you have two data centers that are being backed up, you may have the same types of machines in both sites, but one of the data centers is remote from the backup-pc server and you only want 4 machines at the remote site to be simultaneously backed up to restrict bandwidth use etc. For example, this would allow one to define a config file for Linux vs. Windows machines or for desktops vs. notebooks or for critical machines vs. less critical machines (I know you can currently do this in a kludgey fashion using links or by adding perl code to the config file but it would be nice to have a better way to do it). At one point I looked at including a series of perl files in an existing per host config file to build up the default settings. I need to go back and look at that again. This generalization of host groups could easily include the notion of maximum simultaneous group backups to run. Only if the two host and simultaneous backup groups overlapped 100%. E.G. I have two redundant database servers db10 and db11. Because of the impact of doing backups on the servers, I never want both of them at a site to be backed up at the same time. So these would share the same configurations (or part of a configuration) and also be a group that would be limited to 1 backup from the group at a time. Now add a second (redundant) site/cluster with database servers db21 and db22. Now all 4 servers can share a config, but I have two different sub-groups of servers (db11, db12) and (db21 and db22) that have different rules about the max number of backups to be done. -- -- rouilj John Rouillard System Administrator Renesys Corporation 603-244-9084 (cell) 603-643-9300 x 111 -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] Clusters of hosts
John Rouillard wrote: For example, this would allow one to define a config file for Linux vs. Windows machines or for desktops vs. notebooks or for critical machines vs. less critical machines (I know you can currently do this in a kludgey fashion using links or by adding perl code to the config file but it would be nice to have a better way to do it). At one point I looked at including a series of perl files in an existing per host config file to build up the default settings. I need to go back and look at that again. This generalization of host groups could easily include the notion of maximum simultaneous group backups to run. Only if the two host and simultaneous backup groups overlapped 100%. E.G. I have two redundant database servers db10 and db11. Because of the impact of doing backups on the servers, I never want both of them at a site to be backed up at the same time. So these would share the same configurations (or part of a configuration) and also be a group that would be limited to 1 backup from the group at a time. Now add a second (redundant) site/cluster with database servers db21 and db22. Now all 4 servers can share a config, but I have two different sub-groups of servers (db11, db12) and (db21 and db22) that have different rules about the max number of backups to be done. Maybe a 'groups' concept could be added such that you could put a host in multiple groups with an order specified and the perl-snippet configurations are just evaluated in cascading order (site level, group1, group2..., host). That should be easy to do and would make sense if you generally don't overlap the group variables but might get confusing if you get carried away. You'd still have to tie the rate-limiting value to the group definition where it was specified, though, so a host in multiple groups wouldn't start a backup if it would exceed any of the limits that had been picked up. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] backup from the internet?
Hi, I want to make backups for some members of my family and I'm trying to find a way to use something else than netbios names, but rather dynamicdomains like useralias.no-ip.com . Is there any way to do that with backuppc? Also, two computers are in the same remote house so I might need to do some port redirection on their router but I would need to know how to use an alternate port. I'm thinking of installing/using some sftp server sofware on their computer. Thanks! +-- |This was sent by krunchyf...@videotron.ca via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] send emails to customers AND admin?
Hi, I'm trying to find a way to send an email to the personal email of the people I'm doing their backups for. I tried to search but the terms email and message are so general it gives me almost all the posts on the forum! :? +-- |This was sent by krunchyf...@videotron.ca via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] backup the backuppc pool with bacula
There are several implied references here to likely problems with rsync and how they are all deal breakers. I've been trying to find a solution to this problem for weeks and have not found any direct documentation or evidence to support what is being said here. I'm not skeptical, though, I just need to understand what's going on. Rsync is the only option for me, and I'm rather confused by the other solutions floated in this and other threads. On-site backup is precarious and viable only in a datacenter type situation imho. What about the fire scenario? Getting the data somewhere else is crucial, and in my case I am limited to rsync through rsh. I'm running rsync 3.0.6 but the server is 2.6.x. I have ~ 1.9 files found by rsync and it always fails on some level. I use -aH but it randomly exits with an unknown error during remote comparison or the initial transfers. During the transfer phase it says its sending data, but nothing shows up on the server. The server admins are not aware of any incompatibility with their filesystem and the internet does not seem to deal with this problem, which brings me back to the initial question. What does one use if not rsync? There's no way to justify or implement backing up the entire pool every time without a lot of bandwidth, which I don't have. What exactly is rsync's problem? Do I really need to shut down backuppc every time I want to attempt a sync or would syncing to a local disk and rsync'ing from that be sufficient? I'd really like to know the specifics of the hardlink and inode problem talked about in this thread like how to find out how many I have and what the threshold is for Trouble and how the rest of the community deals with getting pools of 100+GB offsite in less than a week of transfer time. Lots of info requests, I know, but I really appreciate the help. My ISP and all the experts I've tapped are completely stumped on this one. Holger Parplies wrote: Hi, Rob Terhaar wrote on 2009-05-21 13:01:58 -0400 [Re: [BackupPC-users] backup the backuppc pool with bacula]: [...] Try Rsync v3, it has much lower memory requirements since it builds the file list incrementally. by all means, try it. But it's not the file list that is the specific problem of BackupPC. I used it at one company to do nightly syncs of their ~4TB backuppc pool offsite. It's still a matter of file count (used inodes, to be exact), not pool storage size. rsync V3 may perform significantly better if you have many links to comparatively few inodes, but if you have many inodes (for some unknown value of many), I am still convinced that you will hit a problem. Feel free to convince me otherwise, but works for me is unlikely to succeed ;-). Regards, Holger -- Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT is a gathering of tech-side developers brand creativity professionals. Meet the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, iPhoneDevCamp asthey present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian Group, R/GA, Big Spaceship. http://www.creativitycat.com ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users at lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/ +-- |This was sent by jonathan.hagl...@gotravelsites.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] Clusters of hosts
Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote at about 11:38:30 -0400 on Wednesday, June 10, 2009:
Les Mikesell wrote at about 10:23:10 -0500 on Wednesday, June 10, 2009:
John Rouillard wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:16:33PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:
I don't know how common this usage is, but in our setup we have a lot
of
backuppc hosts that are physically located on a few machines only. It
would be nice if it were possible to allow hosts on different machines
to
be backupped simultaneously, but prevent simultaneous backups(dumps) of
hosts on the same machine.
Any thoughts?
If you have a way of mapping the host names to a physical machine, you
can use my queing/locking strategy described in:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg13698.html
Create one queue/semaphore per physical machine and have the
$Conf{DumpPreUserCmd} command exit with an error if it can't get a
slot/lock (also you will have to set $Conf{UserCmdCheckStatus} = 1;).
As a feature request, I think it would be nice to have a way to add
hosts to groups, then limit how many in each group the scheduler would
start at once. There are several scenarios where this is needed to
avoid overloading some common reasource - like a low-bandwidth link as
well as sharing a physical host or filesystem.
I think the notion of host groups is a good idea. Even more generally,
it would be nice to be able to define config files at the group level
rather than the current choice between the default config.pl file and
host-specific config files.
For example, this would allow one to define a config file for Linux
vs. Windows machines or for desktops vs. notebooks or for critical
machines vs. less critical machines (I know you can currently do this
in a kludgey fashion using links or by adding perl code to the config
file but it would be nice to have a better way to do it).
This generalization of host groups could easily include the notion of
maximum simultaneous group backups to run.
It would also be nice to use the group notion to allow the ability to
specify a different topdir for different groups. This could be useful
in cases where there is not much overlap (i.e. pooling potential)
between groups and where there might be reasons to split the pool
between drives. This would presumably be better than the kludge recently
discussed on this list of running multiple instances of backuppc on
one server.
It would further be beneficial to carry the group distinction to the
web interface so that you could view results by group which could be
helpful if you have *many* machines or if you want to subtotal various
stats by group.
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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] backup the backuppc pool with bacula
jhaglund wrote: I'd really like to know the specifics of the hardlink and inode problem talked about in this thread like how to find out how many I have and what the threshold is for Trouble and how the rest of the community deals with getting pools of 100+GB offsite in less than a week of transfer time. I don't know the details on the problem with rsyncing hardlinks. I just know that rsync cannot deal with the number of hardlinks generated by BackupPC. As to how I get my 750GBs of backups offsite... sneakernet. :) I have a 3-member raid 1 array with the third member being a removable drive enclosure. When I need an offsite backup, I pull this drive, deliver it to a secure storage location, and replace with a new drive. It only takes about 3 hours for the new drive to sync up with the rest of the array. -- Bowie -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] backup the backuppc pool with bacula
jhaglund wrote: There are several implied references here to likely problems with rsync and how they are all deal breakers. I've been trying to find a solution to this problem for weeks and have not found any direct documentation or evidence to support what is being said here. I'm not skeptical, though, I just need to understand what's going on. It boils down to how much RAM rsync needs to handle all the directory entries and hardlinks and the amount of time it takes to wade through them. Rsync is the only option for me, and I'm rather confused by the other solutions floated in this and other threads. On-site backup is precarious and viable only in a datacenter type situation imho. What about the fire scenario? Getting the data somewhere else is crucial, and in my case I am limited to rsync through rsh. I'm running rsync 3.0.6 but the server is 2.6.x. I have ~ 1.9 files found by rsync and it always fails on some level. I use -aH but it randomly exits with an unknown error during remote comparison or the initial transfers. During the transfer phase it says its sending data, but nothing shows up on the server. The server admins are not aware of any incompatibility with their filesystem and the internet does not seem to deal with this problem, which brings me back to the initial question. 3.x on both ends might help. It claims to not need the whole directory in memory at once - but you'll still need to build a table to map all the inodes with more than one link (essentially everything) to re-create the hardlinks so you have to throw a lot of RAM at it anyway. You shouldn't actually crash unless you run out of both ram and swap, but if you push the system into swap you might as well quit anyway. Note that if you can do rsync over ssh initiated from the other site, you could just run the backuppc server there, or a separate independent copy. Unless you have a lot of duplication among the on-site servers there wouldn't be a huge difference in traffic after the initial copy and you don't have a single point of failure. What does one use if not rsync? The main alternative is some form of image-copy of the archive partition. This is only practical if you have physical access to the server or very fast network connections. There's no way to justify or implement backing up the entire pool every time without a lot of bandwidth, which I don't have. What exactly is rsync's problem? Do I really need to shut down backuppc every time I want to attempt a sync or would syncing to a local disk and rsync'ing from that be sufficient? I'd really like to know the specifics of the hardlink and inode problem talked about in this thread like how to find out how many I have and what the threshold is for Trouble and how the rest of the community deals with getting pools of 100+GB offsite in less than a week of transfer time. 100 Gigs might be feasible - it depends more on the file sizes and how many directory entries you have, though. And you might have to make the first copy on-site so subsequently you only have to transfer the changes. Lots of info requests, I know, but I really appreciate the help. My ISP and all the experts I've tapped are completely stumped on this one. The root of the problem is that rsync has to include the entire archive in one pass to map the matching hardlinks - and it has to be able to hold the directory and inode table in RAM to do it at a usable speed. The other limiting issue is that the disk heads have to move around a lot to read and re-create all those directory entries and update the inode link counts. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] backup the backuppc pool with bacula
jhaglund wrote: What does one use if not rsync? In an admittedly non-backuppc environment I've been experimenting with using 'rsync -W' (this means don't use the rsync algorithm) to see if problems similar to the ones you describe go away. I'm still not sure of the result. Using rsync with the -W argument means that complete files will be transfered instead of changed pieces. In an environment where files tend to change completely, or not at all, it makes sense to try this because it means that rsync itself has less to do. I read somewhere that the rsync algorithm is intended for environments where disk bandwidth is greater than network bandwidth. That's a good way to think about it. Cordially, -- Jon Forrest Research Computing Support College of Chemistry 173 Tan Hall University of California Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720-1460 510-643-1032 jlforr...@berkeley.edu -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] Backing up a USB-disk?
Hi! I have backuppc runing on my home LAN, backing up 5 different computers, and working very well. However, I have a USB disk where I keep some stuff that I would like to back up as well. Is there a way of doing this with backuppc? It is not always turned on and plugged in, so setting its mount point as one directory to backup during normal backup doesn't work (shows as empty folder when I try, when it has not been on for some time during the backup process). And as I gather, an incremental backup when it is disconnected means it shows as empty, even if only one run, right? So finding the backup might be tricky. What I would like is to have it as a separate host, and then do manual backups when I want to. Can I do this even though the host it is connected to already is a backuppc host? This would mean defining one host as a subdir of another host, in the config.pl. With the same host name and ip. Anyone got advice on this? Grateful for any help. Magnus Larsson -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] Backing up a USB-disk?
Hi Magnus,
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 09:05:26PM +, Magnus Larsson wrote:
What I would like is to have it as a separate host, and then do manual
backups when I want to. Can I do this even though the host it is
connected to already is a backuppc host? This would mean defining one
host as a subdir of another host, in the config.pl. With the same host
name and ip.
You may simple configure another host (name it, for example,
myserver-usbdisk), then set $Config{ClientNamAlias}.
See
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html#item__conf_clientnamealias_
See also $Conf{BackupsDisable} on how to disable automatic backup of a
particular host:
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html#item__conf_backupsdisable_
HTH,
Tino.
--
What we nourish flourishes. - Was wir nähren erblüht.
www.lichtkreis-chemnitz.de
www.craniosacralzentrum.de
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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] Backing up a USB-disk?
Hi,
Tino Schwarze wrote on 2009-06-10 23:20:29 +0200 [Re: [BackupPC-users] Backing
up a USB-disk?]:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 09:05:26PM +, Magnus Larsson wrote:
What I would like is to have it as a separate host, and then do manual
backups when I want to. Can I do this even though the host it is
connected to already is a backuppc host?
Yes.
This would mean defining one host as a subdir of another host, in the
config.pl. With the same host name and ip.
No. Instead:
You may simple configure another host (name it, for example,
myserver-usbdisk), then set $Config{ClientNamAlias}.
See
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html#item__conf_clientnamealias_
See also $Conf{BackupsDisable} on how to disable automatic backup of a
particular host:
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html#item__conf_backupsdisable_
note that you could even set the PingCmd to a shell script that checks
whether the disk is mounted (eg. '[ -f /path/to/usbdisk/.thisistheusbdisk ]'
if you have a file '.thisistheusbdisk' in the root of your USB disk's file
system - please ask if you need more details). Then you can even keep
automatic backups running (just in case you forget manual backups and the
disk happens to be plugged in at wakeup time).
You might also want to set EMailNotifyOldBackupDays or EMailNotifyMinDays.
Regards,
Holger
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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] Lesson in netiquette (was Re: Upgrading from etch to lenny, was backups not working - backupdisable picking up incorrectly)
Tino Schwarze wrote: On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 01:30:35PM -0400, Jim McNamara wrote: Have you specifically done a dist-upgrade from etch to lenny? [...90 lines snipped...] By the way, top posting (writing above the previous post) is frowned upon by most mailing lists. Most mail programs handle it well, but people trying to read the thread via archives or on older software have trouble when someone writes above the older text. Full-quoting is about the same league. Heh, not to mention thread hijacking... (http://www.mail-archive.com/backuppc-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg14800.html) Live and learn. SCNR, Tino. Chris -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] send emails to customers AND admin?
error403 wrote: Hi, I'm trying to find a way to send an email to the personal email of the people I'm doing their backups for. I tried to search but the terms email and message are so general it gives me almost all the posts on the forum! :? Something like http://linuxgazette.net/issue72/teo.html? Chris -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] backup from the internet?
Chris Robertson wrote: error403 wrote: Hi, I want to make backups for some members of my family and I'm trying to find a way to use something else than netbios names, but rather dynamicdomains like useralias.no-ip.com . Is there any way to do that with backuppc? Define the host as useralias.no-ip.com instead of NETBIOSHostName. Also, two computers are in the same remote house so I might need to do some port redirection on their router but I would need to know how to use an alternate port. This is entirely dependent on the NAT device... The good news is you could forward (for example) port 1418 on the NAT device to port 22 on computer A and port 1419 on the NAT device to port 22 on computer B. I'm thinking of installing/using some sftp server sofware on their computer. Better would be an rsyncd service, as that would allow you to only transfer changes. If they are unix/linux/mac boxes you can use rsync over ssh. On windows you can use ssh port forwarding to connect to rsync in daemon mode. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] backup from the internet?
Les Mikesell wrote: Chris Robertson wrote: error403 wrote: I'm thinking of installing/using some sftp server sofware on their computer. Better would be an rsyncd service, as that would allow you to only transfer changes. If they are unix/linux/mac boxes you can use rsync over ssh. On windows you can use ssh port forwarding to connect to rsync in daemon mode. Indeed. Given the mention of NetBios in the original message, I made the assumption that Windows clients were (exclusively) involved. Thanks for clarifying the other available options. Chris -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] Backing up a USB-disk?
Hi, On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 17:57, Holger Parplieswb...@parplies.de wrote: note that you could even set the PingCmd to a shell script that checks whether the disk is mounted (eg. '[ -f /path/to/usbdisk/.thisistheusbdisk ]' if you have a file '.thisistheusbdisk' in the root of your USB disk's file system - please ask if you need more details). You can use the mountpoint command (present in RHEL 5 or SuSE 10) to test if that path is a mount point for some volume. mountpoint -q /path/to/usbdisk (will set $? to 0 if it's mounted, non-zero otherwise) No need to create .thisistheusbdisk files inside your USB then. HTH, Filipe -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ 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] backup the backuppc pool with bacula
Hi, Les Mikesell wrote on 2009-06-10 15:45:22 -0500 [Re: [BackupPC-users] backup the backuppc pool with bacula]: jhaglund wrote: There are several implied references here to likely problems with rsync and how they are all deal breakers. [...] I just need to understand what's going on. It boils down to how much RAM rsync needs to handle all the directory entries and hardlinks and the amount of time it takes to wade through them. ... where the important part is the hardlinks (see below), because that simply can't be optimized, the file list - while probably consuming more memory in total - can and has been in 3.0 (probably meaning protocol version 30, i.e. rsync 3.x on both sides). I'm running rsync 3.0.6 but the server is 2.6.x. I have ~ 1.9 files found by rsync and it always fails on some level. [...] 3.x on both ends might help. It claims to not need the whole directory in memory at once - but you'll still need to build a table to map all the inodes with more than one link (essentially everything) to re-create the hardlinks so you have to throw a lot of RAM at it anyway. Please read the above carefully. It's not about so many hardlinks (meaning many links to one pool file), it's about so many files that have more than one link - whether it's 2 or 32000 is unimportant (except for the size of the complete file list, which additional hardlinks will make larger). In normal situations, you have a file with more than one link every now and then. rsync expects to have to handle a few of them. With a BackupPC pool it's practically every single file, millions of them or more in some cases. And for each and every one of them, rsync needs to store (at least) the inode number and the full path (probably relative to the transfer root) to one link (probably the first one it encounters, not necessarily the shortest one). Count for yourself: cpool/1/2/3/12345678911234567892123456789312 pc/foo/0/f%2fhome/fuser/ffoo pc/hostname/123/f%2fexport%2fhome/fwopp/f.gconf/fapps/fgnome-screensaver/f%25gconf.xml Round up to a multiple of 8, add maybe 4 bytes of malloc overhead, 4 bytes for a pointer, and factor in that we're simply not used anymore to optimizing storage requirements at the byte level. You're probably going to say, why not simply write that information to disk/database?. Reason 1: That's a lot of temporary space you'll need. If it doesn't fit in memory, we're talking about GB, not a few KB. Reason 2: Access to this table will be in random order. It's not a nice linear scan. Chances are, you'll need to read from disk almost every time. No cache is going to speed this up much, because no cache will be large enough or smart enough to know when which information will be needed again. The same applies to a database. Reason 3: rsync is a general purpose tool. It can't determine ahead of time how many hardlink entries it will need to handle. It could only react to running out of memory. Except for BackupPC pools, it would probably *never* need disk storage. You shouldn't actually crash unless you run out of both ram and swap, but if you push the system into swap you might as well quit anyway. This is the same as reason 2. You should realize that disk is not slightly slower than RAM, it's many orders of magnitude slower. It won't take 2 hours instead of 1 hour, it will take 1 hours (or more) instead of 1. That is over one year. Swap works well, as long as your working set fits into RAM. That is not the case here. [In reality, it might not be quite so dramatic, but the point is: you don't know. It simply might take a year. Or 10. Supposing your disks last that long ;-] What does one use if not rsync? The main alternative is some form of image-copy of the archive partition. This is only practical if you have physical access to the server or very fast network connections. Physical access probably meaning, that you can transport your copy to and from the server. Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station waggon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. (Andrew S. Tanenbaum). Do I really need to shut down backuppc every time I want to attempt a sync or would syncing to a local disk and rsync'ing from that be sufficient? Try something like time find /var/lib/backuppc -ls /dev/null to get a feeling for just how long only traversing the BackupPC pool and doing a stat() on each file really takes. Then remember that syncing to a local disk is in no way simpler than syncing to a remote disk - the bandwidth for copying is simply higher, so that is the only place you get a speedup. From a different perspective: either it's going to be fast enough that shutting down BackupPC won't hurt, or it's going to be *necessary* to shut down BackupPC, because having it modify the file system would hurt. Just imagine the pc/ directory links on your copy would point to a
Re: [BackupPC-users] Backing up a USB-disk?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Holger Parplies wrote:
Hi,
Tino Schwarze wrote on 2009-06-10 23:20:29 +0200 [Re: [BackupPC-users]
Backing up a USB-disk?]:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 09:05:26PM +, Magnus Larsson wrote:
You may simple configure another host (name it, for example,
myserver-usbdisk), then set $Config{ClientNamAlias}.
See
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html#item__conf_clientnamealias_
See also $Conf{BackupsDisable} on how to disable automatic backup of a
particular host:
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html#item__conf_backupsdisable_
note that you could even set the PingCmd to a shell script that checks
whether the disk is mounted (eg. '[ -f
/path/to/usbdisk/.thisistheusbdisk ]'
if you have a file '.thisistheusbdisk' in the root of your USB disk's file
system - please ask if you need more details). Then you can even keep
automatic backups running (just in case you forget manual backups and the
disk happens to be plugged in at wakeup time).
Or using the default config which says that if the share backup is
empty then consider it a failure. Thus you can allow backuppc to
regularly attempt a backup automatically, if the USB disk is not
connected then it will fail, if it is connected then you get a new backup.
Regards,
Adam
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkowcIcACgkQGyoxogrTyiWQ8gCgqqpQXZFu7mDI0eMLHS37swo3
VXYAoIgjhjQPQj8aXBw1jeDjzxaURuTm
=d/A9
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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] Backing up a USB-disk?
Tino Schwarze wrote at about 23:20:29 +0200 on Wednesday, June 10, 2009:
Hi Magnus,
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 09:05:26PM +, Magnus Larsson wrote:
What I would like is to have it as a separate host, and then do manual
backups when I want to. Can I do this even though the host it is
connected to already is a backuppc host? This would mean defining one
host as a subdir of another host, in the config.pl. With the same host
name and ip.
You may simple configure another host (name it, for example,
myserver-usbdisk), then set $Config{ClientNamAlias}.
To be complete you would probably need to also do the following:
1. On the original (non-alias) version of the host, exclude the mount
point for the USB disk
2. On the alias version, set the share name to start the backup at the
mount point
3. Set DumpPreUserCmd to test to make sure the usb disk is mounted and
return non-zero exit status if not. This makes sure that the
alternate host is only backed up if the disk is mounted.
Also set:
$Conf{UserCmdCheckStatus} = 1
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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] backup the backuppc pool with bacula
Holger Parplies wrote at about 04:22:03 +0200 on Thursday, June 11, 2009: Hi, Les Mikesell wrote on 2009-06-10 15:45:22 -0500 [Re: [BackupPC-users] backup the backuppc pool with bacula]: jhaglund wrote: There are several implied references here to likely problems with rsync and how they are all deal breakers. [...] I just need to understand what's going on. It boils down to how much RAM rsync needs to handle all the directory entries and hardlinks and the amount of time it takes to wade through them. ... where the important part is the hardlinks (see below), because that simply can't be optimized, the file list - while probably consuming more memory in total - can and has been in 3.0 (probably meaning protocol version 30, i.e. rsync 3.x on both sides). Holger, I may be wrong here, but I think that you get the more efficient memory usage as long as both client server are version =3.0 even if protocol version is set to 30 (which is true for BackupPC where it defaults back to version 28). I think protocol 30 has more to do with the changes from md4sums to md5sums plus the ability to have longer file names (255 characters I think) plus other protocol extensions. But I'm not an expert and my understanding is that the protocols themselves are not well documented other than looking through the source code. I'm running rsync 3.0.6 but the server is 2.6.x. I have ~ 1.9 files found by rsync and it always fails on some level. [...] 3.x on both ends might help. It claims to not need the whole directory in memory at once - but you'll still need to build a table to map all the inodes with more than one link (essentially everything) to re-create the hardlinks so you have to throw a lot of RAM at it anyway. Please read the above carefully. It's not about so many hardlinks (meaning many links to one pool file), it's about so many files that have more than one link - whether it's 2 or 32000 is unimportant (except for the size of the complete file list, which additional hardlinks will make larger). In normal situations, you have a file with more than one link every now and then. rsync expects to have to handle a few of them. With a BackupPC pool it's practically every single file, millions of them or more in some cases. And for each and every one of them, rsync needs to store (at least) the inode number and the full path (probably relative to the transfer root) to one link (probably the first one it encounters, not necessarily the shortest one). Count for yourself: cpool/1/2/3/12345678911234567892123456789312 pc/foo/0/f%2fhome/fuser/ffoo pc/hostname/123/f%2fexport%2fhome/fwopp/f.gconf/fapps/fgnome-screensaver/f%25gconf.xml Round up to a multiple of 8, add maybe 4 bytes of malloc overhead, 4 bytes for a pointer, and factor in that we're simply not used anymore to optimizing storage requirements at the byte level. You're probably going to say, why not simply write that information to disk/database?. Reason 1: That's a lot of temporary space you'll need. If it doesn't fit in memory, we're talking about GB, not a few KB. Reason 2: Access to this table will be in random order. It's not a nice linear scan. Chances are, you'll need to read from disk almost every time. No cache is going to speed this up much, because no cache will be large enough or smart enough to know when which information will be needed again. The same applies to a database. Reason 3: rsync is a general purpose tool. It can't determine ahead of time how many hardlink entries it will need to handle. It could only react to running out of memory. Except for BackupPC pools, it would probably *never* need disk storage. You shouldn't actually crash unless you run out of both ram and swap, but if you push the system into swap you might as well quit anyway. This is the same as reason 2. You should realize that disk is not slightly slower than RAM, it's many orders of magnitude slower. It won't take 2 hours instead of 1 hour, it will take 1 hours (or more) instead of 1. That is over one year. Swap works well, as long as your working set fits into RAM. That is not the case here. [In reality, it might not be quite so dramatic, but the point is: you don't know. It simply might take a year. Or 10. Supposing your disks last that long ;-] What does one use if not rsync? The main alternative is some form of image-copy of the archive partition. This is only practical if you have physical access to the server or very fast network connections. Physical access probably meaning, that you can transport your copy to and from the server. Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station waggon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.
Re: [BackupPC-users] Backing up a USB-disk?
Great, thanks!!
That part on checking whether the disk is mounted - could you give me
some more details on that? Never used such a script here.
Magnus
ons 2009-06-10 klockan 23:57 +0200 skrev Holger Parplies:
Hi,
Tino Schwarze wrote on 2009-06-10 23:20:29 +0200 [Re: [BackupPC-users]
Backing up a USB-disk?]:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 09:05:26PM +, Magnus Larsson wrote:
What I would like is to have it as a separate host, and then do manual
backups when I want to. Can I do this even though the host it is
connected to already is a backuppc host?
Yes.
This would mean defining one host as a subdir of another host, in the
config.pl. With the same host name and ip.
No. Instead:
You may simple configure another host (name it, for example,
myserver-usbdisk), then set $Config{ClientNamAlias}.
See
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html#item__conf_clientnamealias_
See also $Conf{BackupsDisable} on how to disable automatic backup of a
particular host:
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html#item__conf_backupsdisable_
note that you could even set the PingCmd to a shell script that checks
whether the disk is mounted (eg. '[ -f /path/to/usbdisk/.thisistheusbdisk ]'
if you have a file '.thisistheusbdisk' in the root of your USB disk's file
system - please ask if you need more details). Then you can even keep
automatic backups running (just in case you forget manual backups and the
disk happens to be plugged in at wakeup time).
You might also want to set EMailNotifyOldBackupDays or EMailNotifyMinDays.
Regards,
Holger
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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/
--
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
___
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] backup of novel servers
Dear All, i am using BackupPC to succesfully backup up linux client and working fine. i also have 2 novell Netware servers which i would like to backup with backuppc does backuppc support backin up Novell Netware servers I have 4.11 and 5 server thanks and regards -- Network ADMIN - KUWAIT MUNICIPALITY: -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ 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/
