Amanda-Users

Re: Bacula vs. amanda?

2004-09-29 04:51:04
Subject: Re: Bacula vs. amanda?
From: Kai Zimmer <kai AT zimmer DOT net>
To: "amanda-users AT amanda DOT org" <amanda-users AT amanda DOT org>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 10:42:44 +0200
Hi Jonathan,

i used Bacula before i came to Amanda. Bacula is really nice - easy to setup, good documentation and so on. It saves information about files/dumpdates and so on in a mysql database which (in my case) turned out to be a bad idea. My datasets are huge, consisting of millions of xml-snippets. So mysql had lots of work to do and grew enormously to over 6 GB. Doing a single-file restore works fine, but once i had to do a complete system-recovery: The restore-interface consulted mysql and it took more than one week, before i interrupted it and did a (not much faster) direct restore from tape. After all it took me 14 days to restore the system.

And that's why i switched to Amanda ;-)

Kai


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>