Holger Parplies wrote at about 01:56:31 +0100 on Saturday, December 20, 2008:
> Hi,
>
> Adam Goryachev wrote on 2008-12-20 00:55:45 +1100 [Re: [BackupPC-users]
> Permission denied during backup]:
> > In my setup, there are no other files on a "normal" system that will not
> > be backed u
Anand Gupta wrote at about 04:11:05 +0530 on Saturday, December 20, 2008:
> Now i need to setup a windows host. I do have a question on that though, the
> cygwin-rsync package from sf states it doesn't have ssh on it, however from
> the howto it looks to me ssh would be required. Any ideas on th
I guess that updatedb thing reinforces my arguement about not seeing any
mixed load tests. ext3 handles these situations pretty good, maybe XFS does
not...
By the way, I read that EXT4 should allow for EXT3>EXT4 upgrades. One(of
many) nice things about EXT4 is delayed writes which essentially me
Hi,
The server seems to be at a good level of performance now (1 hour and
45 minutes), thank you all for your help!
Retrospective, for people coming across this thread later and wanting
to fix backuppc xfs performance problems:
To fix this problem, I set the noatime and nodiratime options on the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Johan Ehnberg wrote:
> > So, probably better to pass --one-file-system to rsync rather than
> > worrying about trying to exclude /proc, /sys, etc...
>
> But then we have to worry about mounts on each client separately to get
> it all backed up, ri
true enough.
I have been doing a lot of expirimentation with opensolaris and zfs for
backuppc. It is a bit of a pain getting backuppc working on opensolaris,
specifically CPAN stuff.
I am still in testing but ZFS seems to be an ideal filesystem for
backuppc. SUN claims that it is essentially b
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 10:13:08AM -0700, dan wrote:
> If the disk usage is the same as before the pool, the issue isnt hardlinks
> not being maintained. I am not convinced that XFS is an ideal filesystem.
> I'm sure it has it's merits, but I have lost data on 3 filesystems ever,
> FAT*, XFS and
Hi all,
I run BackupPC successfully for some time.
AFAIR I haven't made any changes in the config, but now the nightly
backups are not started anymore, while Pool and Cpool cleaning jobs are.
Even though some backups are overdue, all hosts are marked as idle (both
in column "State" and "Last att
I would suggest ( on linux anyway ) that you stick with ext3 unless it is
incapable of handling your pool data until ext4 is marked stable. Then look
at btfs or tux3 and see what their roadmaps say. ext3 is a good
filesystem. It is fast and reliable. XFS and JFS are ports from other
systems and
>>> 'ls -la' gives (note the size!)
>>> dr-x-- 2 johan johan 0 2008-12-19 14:39 .gvfs
>> Strange. Even an empty directory needs to contain '.' and '..' entries (and
>> the link count 2 suggests that it does). How any file system would store that
>> in 0 bytes ... maybe in the inode? Mis-i
Glassfox wrote:
>
> anandx wrote:
> > Just do a "whereis sudo" to get the actual path and use the same.
> >
> >
> > > I just don't know what about the arguments
> > > before sudo...
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks and Regards,
> >
> > Anand
> >
>
>
> Ok thanks. Now the backup process does no
anandx wrote:
> Just do a "whereis sudo" to get the actual path and use the same.
>
>
> > I just don't know what about the arguments
> > before sudo...
> >
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> Anand
>
Ok thanks. Now the backup process does not want to start. After cancelling I've
seen in the
This is an edited version of a previous post
But if I do that do I now have to go round to every Windows PC I need to backup
and install something. I thought the idea of SMB was to avoid that stage. Maybe
I'm wrong here?
Any particular reason that I should abandon SMB?
PLEASE SEE POS
But if I do that do I now have to go round to every Windows PC I need to backup
and install something. I thought the idea of SMB was to avoid that stage. Maybe
I'm wrong here?
Any particular reason that I should abandon SMB?
+
Just do a "whereis sudo" to get the actual path and use the same.
>I just don't know what about the arguments
>before sudo...
--
Thanks and Regards,
Anand
--
___
BackupPC-us
Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote:
> Glassfox wrote:
>
>
> > It's getting better, but there is still a bug. I think this is this
> > line in the config.pl:
> >
> > $Conf{RsyncClientCmd} = 'sudo $rsyncPath $argList+';
> >
> > Is "sudo" added in right way?
> >
>
> No, you need to supply the fu
But if I do that do I now have to go round to every Windows PC I need to backup
and install something. I thought the idea of SMB was to avoid that stage. Maybe
I'm wrong here?
Any particular reason that I should abandon SMB?
+
I finally setup my first winxp node with backuppc. Now i am facing some
problem here.
Node Name : a3520
DHCP : Selected
When i do an nmblookup on the node, i get the following
nmblookup a3520
querying a3520 on 10.211.55.255
10.211.55.3 a3520<00>
Looking at backuppc interface, i see it uses nmbl
Glassfox wrote:
> It's getting better, but there is still a bug. I think this is this
> line in the config.pl:
>
> $Conf{RsyncClientCmd} = 'sudo $rsyncPath $argList+';
>
> Is "sudo" added in right way?
No, you need to supply the full path to sudo, as these commands are
not interpreted by a sh
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 6:22 AM, Chris Robertson wrote:
> dan wrote:
> > If the disk usage is the same as before the pool, the issue isnt
> > hardlinks not being maintained. I am not convinced that XFS is an
> > ideal filesystem. I'm sure it has it's merits, but I have lost data
> > on 3 filesy
Hi Cody,
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 4:16 AM, Cody Dunne wrote:
> Hi Anand,
>
> Anand Gupta wrote:
> > Now i need to setup a windows host. I do have a question on that though,
> > the cygwin-rsync package from sf states it doesn't have ssh on it,
> > however from the howto it looks to me ssh would b
21 matches
Mail list logo
