Re: Backups
On Mon, Sep 21, 1998 at 03:26:10PM -0400, stick@richnet.net wrote:
> Stephen J. Carpenter said
> > On Tue, Aug 04, 1998 at 11:22:29AM +0100, C.J.LAWSON wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > This is a bit off topic (and sorry I cannae answer any of your
> > > questions) ... Is tar ever used for backing up and if not why not .. if it
> > > is why is it not the defacto standard
> > >
> > > --Jonathan
> >
> > Well...I use tar...
> >
> [snipped testimonial]
> >
> > I love tar it works great...
> >
> I think that last phrase should be qualified.
> I've had two instances where a physical error on the disk was not caught
> by tar. On both of those scenarios tar kept witting even though it was
> not possible to restore past that point.
you have a point...I did this once...but..
I ALWAYS invoke tar with the v option to be verbose and I come back and check
the verbose spewings of it.
The one time this happened to me it had errors from that point on and
I knew the backup didn't work. (which is why I have more than one tape)
BTW I find I have to retensiont he tape every other backup...that is what
caused the problem)
> I don't use tar for backups anymore. I use BRU2000 almost exclusively.
> Though I do *some* backups using alternative technologies just to keep
> my data safe...I don't think that all of our backups should rely on any
> one technology - use magnetic and optical, tape and disk, IDE and SCSI,
> etc.
I would like to try dump...and I got rdump working but...
it says it will need 23 tapes to backup...when I KNO WI can get it on 1 tape..
obviously a tape density problem but...dunno how to fix it
-Steve
--
/* -- Stephen Carpenter <sjc@delphi.com> --- <sjc@debian.org>------------ */
E-mail "Bumper Stickers":
"A FREE America or a Drug-Free America: You can't have both!"
"honk if you Love Linux"
Reply to: