Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Virtual Backups - Do we actually need full backups anymore?

2011-01-06 12:56:43
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Virtual Backups - Do we actually need full backups anymore?
From: Mister IT Guru <misteritguru AT gmx DOT com>
To: bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 17:54:32 +0000
On 06/01/2011 17:44, Graham Keeling wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 11:36:10AM -0600, Sean Clark wrote:
>> On 01/06/2011 11:24 AM, Mister IT Guru wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2011 17:16, Graham Keeling wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 05:02:47PM +0000, Mister IT Guru wrote:
>>>>> I've been trying to get my head around virtual full backups.
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>> So, I would be very pleased if a VirtualFull also grabbed new files from 
>>>> the
>>>> client.
>>> Thank you for pointing this out! So it doesn't grab new files from the
>>> client first? Well, that's not the smartest! Hmm, I wonder - How would
>>> you get a job to run run after another job, rather than have bacula
>>> decide via priorities?
>> To be fair - if it's grabbing actual files directly from the client,
>> it's no longer a "virtual" backup.  I got the impression
>> that the point was to generate a "full" backup without having to talk to
>> the client at all.

Okay, I see the point of Virtual Full Backup - this is to be done 
without talking to the client at call, (i did know that! I've been doing 
my homework!) Well, now that I'm looking at the virtual backup in the 
capacity in which it was intended, it seems that a virtual full backup, 
is an amalgamation of the current files stored within bacula. So 
effectively it's a point in time snapshot from when the last 
differential, or incremental finished for that client?

I would still prefer to have the latest files from the client packed 
into this job, but I do understand, that even the very best backups 
really are just a point in time snapshot. Well, I'm a little upset to 
come to this realisation with regards to the theory of it - In practical 
terms, will a virtual full cause a new volume to be created? I ask 
because, if I wanted to copy the latest full onto a DVD (my backups are 
larger than DVD's this is just for the sake of debate.) I'm assuming 
that I can run a virtual full, and then I can copy the disk based file 
VirtualBackUpPool-0026 or whatever it may be, and it will contain all 
data in it's entirety?



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn how Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC) One Node allows customers
to consolidate database storage, standardize their database environment, and, 
should the need arise, upgrade to a full multi-node Oracle RAC database 
without downtime or disruption
http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>