BackupPC-users

Re: [BackupPC-users] splitting backups... how?

2008-05-31 10:31:08
Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] splitting backups... how?
From: Mauro Condarelli <mc5686 AT mclink DOT it>
To: Adam Goryachev <mailinglists AT websitemanagers.com DOT au>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 16:30:44 +0200
Adam Goryachev ha scritto:
> Mauro Condarelli wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have two problems:
> 
>> 1) I have to backup multiple servers and their composed storage exceeds
>> the capacity of my current backup media (500Gb SATA disk); I will add a
>> second one and that would be enough (for the time being). Problem is I
>> would like to avoid using Virtual Volumes (LVM), if at all possible, so
>> I thought I could backup some servers on one disk and others on the
>> other, but I don't know how (end if it is possible at all), since I see
>> only one TopDir setting and nothing comparable in the per-host configs.
>> How should I proceed?
> 
> You can use RAID0 from the md driver without LVM to join the two drives
> together..... Same result though. You won't get the same benefit of
> pooling files if you use two separate media, so backuppc requires all
> backups be stored on the same filesystem.
If I read You correctly:
You force users to have a single-filesystem TopDir because in this way
You can hard-link together identical files; is this correct?
No way around this? (I do not really care about this optimization
since my servers do not have many identical files).

>> 2) I am a bit confused about the schedule configuration. What I would
>> like to achieve is just a single backup cycle: Full backup once a week
>> and daily Incremental ones; as soon as I have a complete new Full I want
>> to discard all old ones (Full & Incremental). What is the right setting
>> to achieve this?
> 
> I don't think backuppc will quite satisfy this requirement. If you keep
> 2 full backups and 6 incremental backups, then by the time you do the
> third full backup the oldest full will be discarded. So you can have a
> minimum of 2 full and 6 incremental (well, you can have 0 incremental
> and 7 fulls, but your backups will take longer).
Again, I'm not quite sure I fully understand (or manage to express
myself fully... after all English is not my first language :) ).
I did set FullKeepCnt=1, FullKeepCntMin=1, IncrKeepCnt=0 and
IncrKeepCntMin=0.
I *hoped* to achieve to always have a single Full, followed by all
Incremental needed to preserve the last one done.
What I would like to achieve is the following sequence:

Sun 1F
Mon 1F 2I
Tue 1F 2I 3I
Wed 1F 2I 3I 4I
Thu 1F 2I 3I 4I 5I
Fri 1F 2I 3I 4I 5I 6I
Sat 1F 2I 3I 4I 5I 6I 7I
Sun 8F
Mon 8F 9I
...

The nI incrementals should be preserved only if needed by the (n+1)I.

Is something like that possible?

If I have two almost-identical full backups on the same media will
they pool space or they will use twice the space of a single Full
backup? (my limited experience seems to point in the direction of
"twice the space", but I am unsure).

Sincerely pooling space between successive backups seems to me more
"interesting" than pooling between possibly unrelated hosts.

Thanks a lot
Mauro

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
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/