Dave wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Rudi Ahlers rudiahl...@gmail.com
mailto:rudiahl...@gmail.com wrote:
let's keep the question simple. WHICH filesystem would be best for
this type of operation? SMB, NFS, or iSCSI?
As someone said, these are all bad if your channel is
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Dave
tdbtdb+cen...@gmail.comtdbtdb%2bcen...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Rudi Ahlers rudiahl...@gmail.comwrote:
let's keep the question simple. WHICH filesystem would be best for this
type of operation? SMB, NFS, or iSCSI?
As
The CIFS mounts can't be unmounted without a reboot,
so they build-up a pool of mounts to the same server which cause extra
latency
Is there an environmental restriction in your application or organization
for this? Normally CIFS mounts can umounted easily in runtime.
At any rate...
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Geoff Galitz ge...@galitz.org wrote:
The CIFS mounts can't be unmounted without a reboot,
so they build-up a pool of mounts to the same server which cause extra
latency
Is there an environmental restriction in your application or organization
for
Am 28.01.2010 12:28, schrieb Rudi Ahlers:
NOW, the question is: Which protocol would be best for this? I can only
think of SMB, NFS iSCSI
How about NFS v4? It only needs one port which you can tunnel through ssh.
Rainer
___
CentOS mailing list
Rudi Ahlers wrote on Fri, 29 Jan 2010 12:27:49 +0200:
what do you mean by this?
exactly as he says. Any mounts can be undone (mount/umount). Maybe not
thru your Cpanel, but in reality.
Kai
--
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Actually I know nothing about iSCSI, maybe it is more robust.
No. Not if, but *when* you get the first disconnection, you will
likely incur corruption on the block device. That's like pulling
out a disc on a running server. Doesn't make for a dependable
backup solution...
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of
Rudi Ahlers
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 12:23 AM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] NFS vs SMb vs iSCSI for remote backup mounts
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:18 AM
At any rate... if I were in your shoes and really restricted to the options you
propose, I would go with CIFS mounts through IPSEC tunnels.
Wouldn't IPSEC add more overhead than an SSH tunnel?
-geoff
I would *certainly* not use ssh-tunnels, on a line that is not 100% error free
or with high
On Jan 29, 2010, at 2:37 AM, Rudi Ahlers rudiahl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 2:17 AM, Ross Walker rswwal...@gmail.com
wrote:
It's not easy backing up from behind the firewall.
What about using a service that will backup the mobile clients to an
offsite repository that is
On 1/29/2010 1:37 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Backing up behind the firewall is made easy by using an SSH tunnel :)
We already have an offsite backup facility with a 3rd party, but I need
more control over the backups, and want to setup an inhouse backup
server which where all the client's
Hi,
I would like to get some input from people who have used these options for
mounting a remote server to a local server. Basically, I need to replicate /
backup data from one server to another, but over the internet (i.e. insecure
channels)
Currently we have been mounting an SMB share over
Greetings,
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Rudi Ahlers r...@softdux.com wrote:
Hi,
NOW, the question is: Which protocol would be best for this? I can only
think of SMB, NFS iSCSI
Just an innocent and possibly OOB suggestion -- what you think of sshfs
Regards
Rajagopal
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Rajagopal Swaminathan
raju.rajs...@gmail.com wrote:
Greetings,
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Rudi Ahlers r...@softdux.com wrote:
Hi,
NOW, the question is: Which protocol would be best for this? I can only
think of SMB, NFS iSCSI
Just an innocent
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Hi,
I would like to get some input from people who have used these options
for mounting a remote server to a local server. Basically, I need to
replicate / backup data from one server to another, but over the
internet (i.e. insecure channels)
Currently we have
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Hi,
I would like to get some input from people who have used these options for
mounting a remote server to a local server. Basically, I need to replicate /
backup data from one server to another, but over the internet (i.e. insecure
channels)
NFS and CIFS and iSCSI are
Anytime someone mentions backups, I have a knee-jerk reaction to mention
backuppc because it is simple and will likely do anything you need. Docs
are
here: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/ It is packaged in epel. It can use
rsync
(with/without ssh), smb, or tar for the backup transport.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:04 PM, nate cen...@linuxpowered.net wrote:
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Hi,
I would like to get some input from people who have used these options
for
mounting a remote server to a local server. Basically, I need to
replicate /
backup data from one server to another,
On 1/28/2010 3:01 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Anytime someone mentions backups, I have a knee-jerk reaction to mention
backuppc because it is simple and will likely do anything you need.
Docs are
here: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/ It is packaged in epel. It
can use
On 1/28/2010 3:13 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
We used to do it like that - rsync over SSH, but the amount of support
calls we got with this solution was just too much.
So, instead we mounted the backup volumes on the servers, and the end
users (most of them being developers graphic designers)
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.comwrote:
This is probably getting repetitive, but backuppc provides a web
interface where server 'owners' can browse their own backups, select
what they want, and click a button to restore or download to their
desktop. It's
On 1/28/2010 4:30 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
ok, forget about rsync. forget about which backup script is better, and
which isn't. forget about how I get the data onto the order server. I
don't care about backups, or rsync, or backuppc or bacula or amanda, or
R1soft
let's keep the question
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
let's keep the question simple. WHICH filesystem would be best for
this type of operation? SMB, NFS, or iSCSI?
ISCSI is not a file system, its purely a block device. works best over
fast low latency dedicated links.
I think NFS would be better for unix to unix than SMB.
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
let's keep the question simple. WHICH filesystem would be best for this type
of operation? SMB, NFS, or iSCSI?
none
nate
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
let's keep the question simple. WHICH filesystem would be best for this type
of operation? SMB, NFS, or iSCSI?
none
nate
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:05 AM, nate cen...@linuxpowered.net wrote:
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
let's keep the question simple. WHICH filesystem would be best for this
type
of operation? SMB, NFS, or iSCSI?
none
nate
___
CentOS mailing list
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:18 AM, nate cen...@linuxpowered.net wrote:
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
nate, why not? Is it simply unavoidable at all costs to mount on system
on
another, over a WAN? That's all I really want todo
If what you have now works, stick with it.. in general network
file
On 1/28/2010 5:13 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
nate, why not? Is it simply unavoidable at all costs to mount on system
on another, over a WAN? That's all I really want todo
You are introducing unpredictable delays and possible
retries/disconnects into kernel layers that aren't very well prepared
On 1/28/2010 5:23 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
So, is there any benefit in using NFS over SMB in this case? The CIFS
mounts can't be unmounted without a reboot, so they build-up a pool of
mounts to the same server which cause extra latency
I don't understand either of not being able to unmount a
On Jan 28, 2010, at 6:23 PM, Rudi Ahlers rudiahl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:18 AM, nate cen...@linuxpowered.net wrote:
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
nate, why not? Is it simply unavoidable at all costs to mount on
system on
another, over a WAN? That's all I really want todo
If
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 2:17 AM, Ross Walker rswwal...@gmail.com wrote:
It's not easy backing up from behind the firewall.
What about using a service that will backup the mobile clients to an
offsite repository that is accessible also from behind the firewall.
I was pitched something not
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Rudi Ahlers rudiahl...@gmail.com wrote:
let's keep the question simple. WHICH filesystem would be best for this
type of operation? SMB, NFS, or iSCSI?
As someone said, these are all bad if your channel is insecure.
Actually I know nothing about iSCSI,
On Friday, January 29, 2010 03:49 PM, Dave wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Rudi Ahlers rudiahl...@gmail.com
mailto:rudiahl...@gmail.com wrote:
let's keep the question simple. WHICH filesystem would be best for
this type of operation? SMB, NFS, or iSCSI?
As someone said,
33 matches
Mail list logo
