On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Phil Stracchino <alaric AT metrocast DOT net> wrote:

On 05/28/10 13:24, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> I agree, I haven't looked into BaseJobs yet because they are not the
> easiest thing to understand. Since I've very pressed for time, I don't
> have a lot of time to commit to reading. I plan on understanding it, but
> when a system can do it automatically and transparently, I like that a lot.

The basic concept behind base jobs is that you define one machine (or
the base OS install image on that machine) as a reference install for a
class of similar machines, and do a full backup of *it*, but then for
the other machines in the class, you back up only user data plus any
base system files that are different from those on the reference machine.

Once I have all of my Windows boxes on the same version of Windows again
(right now, half are XP Pro and half are 2K Pro), I'm planning to set up
a base job for them.

That will be near impossible for my Linux servers, they all seem to be at different patch levels. I guess it would do ok for my Windows machines, but if I need bare-metal, there is a reason because the OS was configured differently than the standard. I think this is where dedup could really provide a benefit.

When you patch your servers, do you have to redo your base at the same time to keep it synced?

Robert LeBlanc
Life Sciences & Undergraduate Education Computer Support
Brigham Young University 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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