On 2003.04.03 16:54, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 09:51:25AM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
> As I've indicated earlier, I want to write full backups to tape, but
keep
> some or all of the incremental on the harddisk, so I've set up two
> different configs; one with "skip-incr" that will write to tape, and
one
> without full dumps that will dump to harddisk, via chg-multi and a
> chg-multi.conf where all slots point to file:<some directory>. The
> disklist is shared between the configs. The question is simply, can
they
> share the index as well? Will everything work all right if I simply
> specify the same indexdir for both configs?
I believe they can, however, you can't do an incremental for a config
without first doing a level 0.
Well, I'm also trying to tell Amanda that a full backup is done
off-line by using "force" commands, with arguments based on data from
the first (full) backup.
And on recovery, the incrementals are
?useless? without the level 0.
Really? I thought I could:
1. Do recovery with the full config, then the incremental, to reproduce
the data fully.
2. Fetch individual files from the incremental config, provided that
they were updated recently enough to be included on the incremenal-dump.
Note that my primary concern here is in many ways the recovery of
individual files. Not that I'm not worried about loosing everything on
a disk crash, but I'm not sure I will use amrecover or the indexes on
that event. (And after all, files being deleted by mistake *is* a lot
more likely than a major crash.)
The common index may solve the first problem,
but I don't think it will help the second.
Which is really the one I wanted solved, of course....
- Toralf
|
