Silver Salonen wrote:
>  Eg. if we want to do ordinary Grandfather-Father-Son rotation, we 
> create 3 different pools for every job - for full, differential and 
> incremental backups.

That is not how I understand GFS system, although it is a possibility. I 
understand it as Full, plus (incremental OR differential).

So important clients (like secretary's machine) receive a full backup 
each week and a differential (all changed files since full backup) 
nightly so that in the need for recovery, it would just be a process 
involving two tape/disk(?) for a full recovery.

OTOH, I might do a differential (all changed files since last backup, 
full or diff or inc) on something on something with humungous amount of 
file changes and non-core/non-critical files to simply keep the backup 
window small. The trade off is that every tape/disk since the full 
backup would need to be processed for a full client recovery.

GFS comes from having multiple complete BACKUPS, i.e. dated versions. 
This makes it a real backup system.


> Using only one pool with the whole backup-disk doesn't make sense to me, 
> because managing these backups would be extremely limited, wouldn't it?

If you want to run your backups like that, then use a raid array. You 
only have a point in the rare occassions where you have small backups 
and monstrous drives. The critical point about a real backup system is 
that it is not just a file copy, but a secure,protected file copy that 
can not be degraded. Writing a whole serious of jobss to one drive that 
sits in the system full time is not a proper backup system.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users