On 10/9/10 10:39 AM, Xuo wrote:
>
>
> Le 06/10/2010 15:04, Michael Stowe a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I would like to backup some laptop computers (for my personal needs).
>>> For the moment, I automount the shared directories of the Windows 7 PC
>>> on my Linux backuppc server. This works fine but the problem is that
>>> some backups are not performed when the laptop is shut down. The backups
>>> start because the Linux server is running but the mount point is down.
>>> I would like to know what are the advantages/drawbacks for laptop pcs of
>>> the following policies :
>>>
>>> * automount of shared directories + rsync (what I do now).
>>> * smb + tar
>>> * rsyncd
>>> * Other ?
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Xuo.
>> Well, if the laptop's down, none of these methods will help you back it
>> up, obviously, but here's a brief outline of the pros and cons:
>>
>> * automount of shared directories + rsync (what I do now).
>> Probably the least bandwidth-efficient, since rsync has to read every file
>> over the mount. Can't handle open files.
>> * smb
>> Requires the least amount of software on the client. Uses timestamp for
>> incrementals, so can miss copied files and renamed directories during
>> incrementals. Can't handle open files.
>> * automount of shared directories + tar
>> All the disadvantages of mounting plus all the disadvantages of tar
>> * rsyncd/rsync
>> Can be bandwidth efficient and seamless, there are scripts publicly
>> available that can handle open files. Within this category, the
>> variations of ssh/rsyncd, rsyncd, winexe/rsync have varying degrees of
>> speed, ease of deployment, and encryption. I use the winexe/rsync method
>> since we have no need of encryption, so we prioritize speed and ease of
>> deployment.
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for your answer and sorry for the delay in response.
>
> * Point 1 : you say rsync has to read all files over the mount, but I
> think
> it is more or less the same for all methods.
If you run rsync over the network instead of locally over a network mount, only
the differences are transferred. The rsync instances at each end only exchange
block checksums to identify already-matching content. On a fast LAN, the
difference may not matter.
> * Point 4 : it seems to be the most widely used but it needs so
> executables
> on all clients. This is a big disadvantage.
Yes, there are some tradeoffs. You could also use smb as the xfer method -
with
the disadvantage of missing new files with old timestamps in incrementals.
> * One point you did not mentioned and I considered as important (if I
> understand the way backupPC works).
> o In case of automounts, the mount point is considered as a local
> directory. If the laptop PC is shutdown, then the directory is
> considered empty and the backup ends normally. There is no more
> backup till the next usual one.
You could use a DumpPreUserCmd or DumpPreShareCmd action to check for something
below the mount point and set UserCmdCheckStatus to fail the backup so retries
will happen.
> o If backups are done with smb, then, if the laptop is shutdown, the
> backup fails and it will be scheduled for the next time (for ex,
> one
> hour later). This is a major advantage of smb vs automount.
> o With rsync/rsyncd, I don't know what the behavior is.
Rsync/rsyncd will fail if the connection fails.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports
standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3.
Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great
experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
|
