Re: [OT] Backup solutions - my preferences
fun stuff... :-)
On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> > i dont have time to play with tapes.. daily changing it..
> > - forget one day... and you're hosed
>
> Haven't used amanda, have you? Just set yourself up with a
> decent-sized holding disk and it's not a problem. (Your backups will
yes... if one has the "holding disk space".. you have backups
already ... no tape needed ??
- at the time i played w/ amanda... amanda required this
holding area and the comp didnt have $$$ for mroe disks
> holding disk. Just be sure the holding disk is a separate physical
> device to minimize the chance of losing it if the system's primary
> drive fails.
backups should always be done on a different server
and preferably on a different 110v circuit
> > i prefer 100GB - 1TB of disks to be backed up to other disks ...
> > ( tapes are too small for "full backups" and definitely too slow )
>
> I presume that's a home system, right? I can't think of any sort of
> professional setup where you would have that much data to back up and
> not have the money for a tape changer.
i backup Terabytes or 10's of Terabytes of data ... when i get called
for backup stuff...
i do not do backup stuff for workstations/homes... need "real $$$"
for "real backups" ... for "supposedly real work done" :-)
> By way of comparison, I work at a manufacturing plant. Home
> directories for ~80 users, plus the company databases total out to a
> little under 30G.
size of data needed depends on the data those users create ...
> not doing a full. Totals out to about 7G a night going onto tape,
> taking 13 minutes to collect all the data onto the holding disk and a
> three and a half to four hours to write it to tape.
good ... :-)
> > - i want the backup to be live within a few minutes
> > of the main server going down for whatever reason
>
> Sounds like you want a redundant server more than a backup solution.
i have 3 redundant backups on a typical backup system
> Even if no human intervention is required, you're going to need more
> than "a few minutes" to copy 100GB-1TB from one hard drive to
> another.
normally... i keep backups in tgz file though... but..
no ... if they want it live... its just change the ip# form backup
to real and you're live and online... which implies they must have
the $$$ and disk space for these backups or cluster or ?? really
do lose few grand of real $$$ if the server goes down for 5 minutes
- so they better plan "everything" for "all contingencies"
( and of course "joe blow" will be on vacation at the time
( the server or disks decides to get sick
> > - i assume "yesterdays or last weeks" tape/disk/backups is BAD
> > and can still receover everything from day before or tonights
> > backup ...
>
> "BAD" in what way? Obsolete? That's why you do nightly
> incrementals. Or do you expect the media to decay within 48 hours?
backups go back for dumb reasons
- disk being full is the most common backup problems
- somebody played witht he patch panel
- power loss
- somebody hit reset on one of their pc that nfs mounted
a server ... and nfs dies or crawls..
- gazillion reasons why backups fail
- gotta keep people out of the loop to avoid backup problems
> > - i can lose 2 FULL backups and still recover everything
>
> Cool. So can I - I run a one-week backup cycle and keep three weeks'
> worth of tapes.
for 7 days.... you will not have proper backup if the last
full backup is faulty .... ??
i run incremental backup across 30 days in addition to the full backup
that we assume worked ... but if it fails ... the 30 or 90 day
incremental backups will compensate for any failed full backup
- i keep 90 - 180 days of backups depending on data/disks available
( probably an overkill ..
( but i want a clean backup if a hacker had been sitting in
( the network for 30 dayz before they wake up and start playing
- and yeah.. one has other problems if you didnt notice a
trojan floating around for 30 days... but it will happen..
c ya
alvin
Reply to: