On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 11:55:41AM -0400, Dan Pritts wrote:
I agree with your general praise, BackupPC works very well for us
in our environment, which is maybe half your size. Due to your
large size, I'll leave you with one thought:
One concern I've always had with backuppc is what would
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 23:20 -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 11:55:41AM -0400, Dan Pritts wrote:
One concern I've always had with backuppc is what would happen if
i had a disaster and had to restore everything from backuppc.
It would take absolutely forever to do
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 08:57:52AM +0100, James Wells wrote:
I find that BackupPC is good for general data retention, but bad
for bare metal restores where you have to reinstall the OS first
and then get data back on there.
Fortunately, I have no need for that. :)
-Robin
--
I agree with your general praise, BackupPC works very well for us in our
environment, which is maybe half your size. Due to your large size, I'll leave
you with one thought:
One concern I've always had with backuppc is what would happen if i had a
disaster and had to restore everything from
On 10/7/2010 10:55 AM, Dan Pritts wrote:
I agree with your general praise, BackupPC works very well for us in our
environment, which is maybe half your size. Due to your large size, I'll
leave you with one thought:
One concern I've always had with backuppc is what would happen if i had a
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 09:56:33PM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
We've got 3 machines with 3.2T, 4.2T, and 851G of backups, all
gathered via rsync over ssh *across the network between distant
data centers* (the backups are in a totally different location
than the servers), each server with
We've got 3 machines with 3.2T, 4.2T, and 851G of backups, all
gathered via rsync over ssh *across the network between distant data
centers* (the backups are in a totally different location than the
servers), each server with 150+ machines to backup every day... and
it's actually working.
I
