BackupPC-users

Re: [BackupPC-users] Backup destination is another server

2014-05-22 15:56:21
Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] Backup destination is another server
From: Holger Parplies <wbppc AT parplies DOT de>
To: "General list for user discussion, questions and support" <backuppc-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 21:45:44 +0200
Hi,

Sharuzzaman Ahmat Raslan wrote on 2014-05-20 15:55:09 +0800 [Re: 
[BackupPC-users] Backup destination is another server]:
> Backing up over VPN is a bad idea.
> [...]
> Your backup will never finish.

I guess that depends on the data set and pattern of changes (and the available
bandwidth, of course).

> What you should do is having a local BackupPC server, that backs up all
> machine, then run rsync to copy the backup data to remote server.

What you should really do is not listen to everything someone on a mailing
list writes ;-).

Replicating a BackupPC pool with rsync *will* break at some point due to the
heavy use of hardlinks. Up to a certain point, it will work more or less
fine, but you never really know when it will break. You might not reach that
point, but are you prepared to depend on that? Can you afford to find out
after the fact? Can you afford to have your BackupPC server severely slowed
down or possibly crashed by the final failing attempts to synchronize the
pool? Remember, the larger your data set, the sooner you will run into
problems.

I say it will work "more or less fine", because you will never really have a
consistent backup of your pool due to the fact that it will not be idle for
the time the rsync process takes, and it might not be obvious, which parts are
inconsistent, because you don't know, how rsync will traverse the file system.

If you think about it, you produce a certain amount of changes to your data
that you need to backup and transfer off-site. The changes to the *pool* may
be smaller or larger. They may typically be smaller (though you *can* use
compression on the transfer between host and BackupPC server), though it is
easy to come up with an example to the opposite effect: think of a slowly
growing large file, where BackupPC will make an independent complete copy each
day, where rsync will only transfer a small delta. Aside from that, I'd be
interested in how rsync handles pool chain renumbering bandwidth-wise.

In any case, you need enough available bandwidth to transfer your changes in
the time they happen, otherwise it won't work. Period.

> This is how I implement a secondary backup for my client.

Have you tested actually *using* that secondary backup?

Hope that helps.

Regards,
Holger

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.
Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
_______________________________________________
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/