Re: Amanda vs. rsync vs. ... (was: Re: using disk instead of tape)
2006-09-06 11:00:46
On Wednesday 06 September 2006 04:23, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> So my ideal backup solution would be Amanda, with support for incrementally
> storing backups at a remote location :-)
Well, Amanda does that, via incremental backups. What it doesn't do (because
of tool support) is incremental backups of individual files -- mostly because
we don't have (I'm not aware of) any tool that does that.
I am aware of how to create such a tool, however, and it's something we might
do once Application API (or maybe Filter API; I'm not quite sure how to fit
it in) lands.
Cheers,
--Ian
--
Wiki for Amanda documentation: http://wiki.zmanda.com/
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: using disk instead of tape, (continued)
- Re: using disk instead of tape, Phil Howard
- Amanda vs. rsync vs. ... (was: Re: using disk instead of tape), Geert Uytterhoeven
- Re: Amanda vs. rsync vs. ... (was: Re: using disk instead of tape), Gene Heskett
- Re: Amanda vs. rsync vs. ... (was: Re: using disk instead of tape),
Ian Turner <=
- Re: Amanda vs. rsync vs. ... (was: Re: using disk instead of tape), Geert Uytterhoeven
- Re: using disk instead of tape, Phil Howard
- Re: using disk instead of tape, Ian Turner
- Re: using disk instead of tape, Phil Howard
- Re: using disk instead of tape, Gene Heskett
- Re: using disk instead of tape, Phil Howard
- Re: using disk instead of tape, Ian Turner
- Re: using disk instead of tape, Phil Howard
Re: using disk instead of tape, Paul Bijnens
|
|
|