> I use Bacula which works very well (much better than > Amanda did). > You may be able to customize it to do direct zfs > send/receive, however I find that although they are > great for copying file systems to other machines, > they are inadequate for backups unless you always > intend to restore the whole file system. Most people > want to restore a file or directory tree of files, > not a whole file system. In the past 25 years of > backups and restores, I've never had to restore a > whole file system. I get requests for a few files, > or somebody's mailbox or somebody's http document > root. > You can directly install it from CSW (or blastwave).
Thanks for your comments, Brian. I should look at Bacula in more detail. As for full restore versus ad hoc requests for files I just deleted, my experience is mostly similar to yours, although I have had need for full system restore more than once. For the restore of a few files here and there, I believe this is now well handled with zfs snapshots. I have always found these requests to be down to human actions. The need for full system restore has (almost) always been hardware failure. If the file was there an hour ago, or yesterday, or last week, or last month, then we have it in a snapshot. If the disk died horribly during a power outage (grrr!) then it would be very nice to be able to restore not only the full file system, but also the snapshots too. The only way I know of achieving that is by using zfs send etc. > > On 6/28/2010 11:26 AM, Tristram Scott wrote: [snip] > > > > Tristram > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discu > ss > -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
