On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:38:30AM -0400, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote at about 10:23:10 -0500 on Wednesday, June 10, 2009:
> > John Rouillard wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:16:33PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:
> > >> I don't know how common this usage is, but
> > >> in our setup we have a lot of backuppc
> > >> "hosts" that are physically located on a
> > >> few machines only. It would be nice if it
> > >> were possible to allow hosts on different
> > >> machines to be backupped simultaneously,
> > >> but prevent simultaneous backups(dumps) of
> > >> hosts on the same machine.
> > > If you have a way of mapping the host names to a physical machine, you
> > > can use my queing/locking strategy described in:
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.mail-archive.com/backuppc-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT
> net/msg13698.html
> > >
> > As a feature request, I think it would be nice to have a way to add
> > hosts to groups, then limit how many in each group the scheduler would
> > start at once. There are several scenarios where this is needed to
> > avoid overloading some common reasource - like a low-bandwidth link as
> > well as sharing a physical host or filesystem.
>
> I think the notion of host groups is a good idea. Even more generally,
> it would be nice to be able to define config files at the group level
> rather than the current choice between the default config.pl file and
> host-specific config files.
I agree with both group definitions, but the hosts should be able
to participate in multiple groups. The groups used to define what
gets backed up and the group that defines how the schedule of
backups occurs should be able to be different. E.G. if you have
two data centers that are being backed up, you may have the same
types of machines in both sites, but one of the data centers is
remote from the backup-pc server and you only want 4 machines at
the remote site to be simultaneously backed up to restrict
bandwidth use etc.
> For example, this would allow one to define a config file for Linux
> vs. Windows machines or for desktops vs. notebooks or for critical
> machines vs. less critical machines (I know you can currently do this
> in a kludgey fashion using links or by adding perl code to the config
> file but it would be nice to have a better way to do it).
At one point I looked at including a series of perl files in an
existing per host config file to build up the default settings.
I need to go back and look at that again.
> This generalization of host groups could easily include the notion of
> maximum simultaneous group backups to run.
Only if the two host and simultaneous backup groups overlapped
100%.
E.G. I have two redundant database servers db10 and db11. Because
of the impact of doing backups on the servers, I never want both
of them at a site to be backed up at the same time. So these
would share the same configurations (or part of a configuration)
and also be a group that would be limited to 1 backup from the
group at a time.
Now add a second (redundant) site/cluster with database
servers db21 and db22. Now all 4 servers can share a config, but
I have two different sub-groups of servers (db11, db12) and (db21
and db22) that have different rules about the max number of
backups to be done.
--
-- rouilj
John Rouillard System Administrator
Renesys Corporation 603-244-9084 (cell) 603-643-9300 x 111
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited
royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing
server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
_______________________________________________
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/
|
