On 6/7/2011 9:51 AM, Boniforti Flavio wrote:
> Hello Jim
>
> [cut]
>
>> Were I attempting to back up the images I would assume that
>> the unused areas would be included. My solution to backing up
>> my VMs was to install backuppc for each of them and treat
>> them the same as physical machines on my net. This did lead
>> to problems backing up Win2K and WinXP VMs, but only those
>> already fully addressed for physical systems.
>
> I understand you are/were working on the same LAN.
>
> My trouble begins at the point where there are 15km between the HQ and
> the backup location!

That's a problem that a sufficient amount of money can solve, with 
'sufficient' varying wildly depending on your location and network 
providers.   But in any case it is likely to be more efficient to back 
up the live machines (virtual or otherwise) than their disk images - and 
that way you also get useful pooling for the storage.

One other point that I'm not sure anyone mentioned yet is that the rsync 
comparison is normally against the previous full run, so it will be 
important to either do only fulls or set incremental levels to make each 
run backed by the previous so the differences don't accumulate over time.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content
authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image
Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
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/