BackupPC-users

Re: [BackupPC-users] Problems with hardlink-based backups...

2009-09-01 01:09:52
Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] Problems with hardlink-based backups...
From: "Jeffrey J. Kosowsky" <backuppc AT kosowsky DOT org>
To: "General list for user discussion, questions and support" <backuppc-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net>
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 01:07:20 -0400
Adam Goryachev wrote at about 14:14:49 +1000 on Tuesday, September 1, 2009:
 > Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
 > > Jim Leonard wrote at about 20:20:59 -0500 on Monday, August 31, 2009:
 > >  > Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
 > >  > > Is it self-evident that a BackupPC tree is difficult to
 > >  > > copy/move/resize if not on a dedicated filesystem? 
 > >  > 
 > >  > What is a "dedicated filesystem"?  How does it differ from any other 
 > >  > filesystem?
 > > 
 > > I mean a filesystem used just for a BackupPC topdir vs. a filesystem
 > > that may contain data and/or code for multiple applications. Based
 > > upon the nearly weekly postings on this group, it seems that many
 > > people (myself included) initially set up their BackupPC topdir on a
 > > filesystem containing mixed data and without the advantage of things
 > > like LVM or ZFS since they don't realize in advance how hard it is to
 > > copy/move/resize the topdir area due to the large number of
 > > hard-links. It seems to me that new users should be strongly advised
 > > to create topdir on a separate ("dedicated") filesystem on top of LVM,
 > > ZFS, RAID, etc. to maximize flexibility. Alternatively, we can
 > > continue to address this same issue every week ;)
 > 
 > BTW, my "simple" solution to this apparently "major" problem was as follows:
 > 1) Start using backuppc with a single FS (/) formatted with reiserfs (my
 > preference).

As I mentioned this is not (well) documented in the BackupPC
documentation and continues to trip up new and not-so-new users
alike. Also, there are use cases where you can't have a single FS for
BackupPC (though Michael Stowe has decided to call them "fringe")

 > 2) Backuppc grows too big for the FS, and I want to add RAID1 backup of
 > the system

 > 3) Purchase and install 2 x 1TB HDD's and configure with a single
 > partition and use MD for RAID1

May be nothing for an enterprise but could be an issue for SOHO use. I
for instance don't have two empty 1TB drives and enclosures hanging
around.

 > 4) Boot from CD/USB live linux system, and use dd to copy the old
 > /dev/sda to /dev/md0
 > 5) Adjust the /etc/fstab on the root FS to mount /dev/md0 onto
 > /var/lib/backuppc
 > 6) mount /dev/md0 somewhere
 > 7) mv var/lib/backuppc backuppc
 > 8) rm -rf all directories other than backuppc
 > 9) mv backuppc/* .
 > 10) rmdir backuppc
 > 11) umount md0
 > 12) adjust the partition size
 > 13) adjust the filesystem size
 > 14) reboot and enjoy the newly expanded pool size
 > 
 > I really don't see why people think this is so difficult... Sure, there
 > are lots of hardlinks, but block level copies are... simple. Sure, the
 > new drive is bigger, but increasing partition sizes and filesystem sizes
 > is simple. No "dangerous" operations, nothing technically hard or
 > difficult... just simple standard unix tools to solve a problem by
 > breaking it down into simple steps.

Some of those operations can be dangerous. I have made mistakes when
manipulating raid and filesystem sizes. But maybe I'm just sloppier
than most ;)
 > 
 > I don't use LVM, in fact I don't really know how to use it. It might
 > have made my life simpler if I had used it, but since I understand MD
 > much more than I understand LVM, I find it more reliable for me.

The point is that playing around with mdadm, lvresize,
resize2fs/resize_rieserfs etc. are not everyday operations for me
and hence open to error - especially since the consequences of errors
can wipe out a whole fs or even disk. I don't think there is anything
wrong with expecting a program that is file-based to be copyable using
standard file-based tools. Sure you can make a setup that avoids the
problem by using dedicated filesystems and block-copying but that
doesn't seem ideal or natural. Again, nobody said there weren't any
solutions -- people just continue on a weekly basis to be dissatisfied
with them....


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
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/