Perhaps if the code that does the chmod/chown were to be a little
smarter....
Perhaps use "find . -perms ... -exec chmod ... {} \; " to find files or
owners that aren't correct and fix them. That way only files that need
to be fixed while have their changetime modified.
----
Matthew Huff | One Manhattanville Rd
Director of Operations | Purchase, NY 10577
OTA LLC | Phone: 914-460-4039
http://www.otaotr.com | Fax: 914-460-4139
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Legato NetWorker discussion
> [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU] On Behalf Of George Sinclair
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 9:50 AM
> To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: [Networker] How not to backup changetime data?
>
> What concerns me is the *amount* of data. This is forcing
> almost a tape every night, but prior to the implementation of
> the cron script that's running these chmods, the affected
> file system was backing up maybe a fraction of a tape, not
> even a gig. In fact, it would sit on a tape for maybe a week
> or more. Now, it's eating through several tapes a week all
> because a few directories are being chmoded. Of course, I'm
> not gonna just blindly skip the data and yes, I realize the
> importance of having all the file attributes in place when
> you recover it -- very good point
> -- BUT I think in some very specific cases that may depend on
> the data in question versus the amount of tape usage. In this
> particular example, there are VERY specific paths that are
> being chmoded, and these are not system files scattered
> around wherein failure to properly recover the correct
> attributes could cause problems (security or otherwise).
> Instead, these are all buried down under the same user data
> area. If the users don't care that the recovered attributes
> are not the same, and all they care about is that the data
> files themselves are the same, then they could always run
> chmod again after the data has been recovered just as the
> script does. In fact, I've looked at the script, and it runs
> the same chmod on the whole thing every night in exactly the
> same way every time. If they agree to it, then it seems that
> using some type of directive like mtimeasm (not sure if this
> works or not) would be a relief. Of course, it's something
> they need to understand ahead of time and be prepared for.
> Would not consider this without proper testing and user
> acceptance, but again, this is not something that I've had
> problems with before. This is the first time I've seen this
> kind of problem on any tape usage level that I would consider
> looking into.
>
> George
>
> Davina Treiber wrote:
> >
> > George Sinclair wrote:
> >
> > > Is there a way to tell NetWorker to only back up a file if its
> > > modification time has changed and not its changetime? Or
> maybe, when
> > > the modification time changes, the changetime changes,
> too? I guess
> > > what I'm asking is if there's a way to NOT back up the
> files if only
> > > something like permissions, group, user, etc. has changed
> and only
> > > back it up if there's actually been a modification to the file
> > > itself and not merely its meta data.
> > >
> > > For example, if some joker runs something like 'chmod -R u+x'
> > > against a directory, NetWorker will re-backup all those
> files since
> > > the changetime has now been affected. As near as I can
> tell there's
> > > no way to directly change the changetime, but doing anything like
> > > chmod, chown or chgrp against a file will affect a new
> changetime,
> > > and NetWorker definitely appears to notice.
> > >
> > > We have a large directory where someone is running a script that
> > > uses chown, chgrp and chmod against it every night, but the
> > > modification times are not changing. Essentially causes
> as much data
> > > as a full to get backed up during incrementals.
> >
> > No there isn't a way to do this and I can't imagine anyone within
> > Legato thinking it would be a good idea to provide this feature, I
> > certainly think it would be pretty dumb. When you do a recovery you
> > expect all the attributes of the recovered files to be the same as
> > they were on the date selected for the recovered data. If the
> > attributes of a file are being modified then it has to be
> regarded as
> > a change so it needs to be backed up, no question about it
> in my opinion.
> >
> > What is it that concerns you about this? Is it the extra time taken
> > for the backups, or the media used? I think if you will do the sums
> > you will find that the saving in media would barely justify
> the time
> > taken for you to post these questions to the list. It's
> probably not
> > even worth worrying about.
> >
> > --
> > Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
> > email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's
> Web site at
> > http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where
> you can also
> > view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
> > should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
> > =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>
> --
> Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker"
> command via email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit
> the list's Web site at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you
> can also view and post messages to the list. Questions
> regarding this list should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>
--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
|
