Amanda-Users

Re: Amanda vs. rsync vs. ... (was: Re: using disk instead of tape)

2006-09-06 11:01:32
Subject: Re: Amanda vs. rsync vs. ... (was: Re: using disk instead of tape)
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert AT linux-m68k DOT org>
To: Ian Turner <ian AT zmanda DOT com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 16:55:59 +0200 (CEST)
On Wed, 6 Sep 2006, Ian Turner wrote:
> 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.

Except that from time to time you need a level 0, which is big. Switching to
pure-incremental doesn't help, since then you (a) need to keep the initial
level 0 forever and (b) restore will be painful since you have to go throughall
incrementals.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                                                Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert AT linux-m68k 
DOT org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                                            -- Linus Torvalds