FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-17-2011, 02:59 AM
Robert Moskowitz
 
Default backing up shadow files with rsync?

On 02/16/2011 08:18 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 11:09 +1030, Tim wrote:
>> On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 13:45 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> Rsnapshot is just a useful front-end to rsync. It keeps snapshots of
>>> an entire tree ordered by backup generation (using hard links to avoid
>>> duplicating files).
>> If you link, instead of duplicating, then you only have one backup of a
>> file. So, if that backup has a problem...?
>>
>> Did I miss something obvious?
> You pays your money and you takes your choice. If you want every backup
> of your 10GB home directory to take up another 10GB of space, go for it.
> Most people don't actually want that. They assume (naively or not) that
> the backup medium is itself sufficiently reliable, for example I'm doing
> it on a NAS configured with mirrored disks, which is fine for my
> purposes. YMMV of course.

I have a 1.5TB USB drive that is my repo server, archiver and backup on
my Amahi server with a 120Gb drive.

I am right now pricing out a 2TB USB drive ($80 on ecost) to put on
another server for backing up the backup. I figure that will give me
enough total redundancy to survive most disasters. This drive will only
be used for a weekly backup and the rest of the time be kept in a firebox...


--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 02-17-2011, 06:44 AM
Tim
 
Default backing up shadow files with rsync?

On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 20:48 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> You pays your money and you takes your choice. If you want every
> backup of your 10GB home directory to take up another 10GB of space,
> go for it. Most people don't actually want that. They assume (naively
> or not) that the backup medium is itself sufficiently reliable, for
> example I'm doing it on a NAS configured with mirrored disks, which is
> fine for my purposes. YMMV of course.

In my case, I was being diligent and backing up things to one of those
external USB drives, and the external drive turned out to be a lemon,
while the originals are all quite fine. I didn't buy an unusual brand
of disc, either, it was a Seagate. I'd always been impressed by them,
before. On the other hand, every Western Digital drive I had, and
friends, lasted little more than a year or two.

--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.



--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 02-17-2011, 11:38 AM
Robert Moskowitz
 
Default backing up shadow files with rsync?

On 02/17/2011 02:44 AM, Tim wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 20:48 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>> You pays your money and you takes your choice. If you want every
>> backup of your 10GB home directory to take up another 10GB of space,
>> go for it. Most people don't actually want that. They assume (naively
>> or not) that the backup medium is itself sufficiently reliable, for
>> example I'm doing it on a NAS configured with mirrored disks, which is
>> fine for my purposes. YMMV of course.
> In my case, I was being diligent and backing up things to one of those
> external USB drives, and the external drive turned out to be a lemon,
> while the originals are all quite fine. I didn't buy an unusual brand
> of disc, either, it was a Seagate. I'd always been impressed by them,
> before. On the other hand, every Western Digital drive I had, and
> friends, lasted little more than a year or two.
>
This is why I am buying a second external USB drive that will be on
another system (ran out of USB ports on my server, and a powered hub is
not worth it) that I will only backup to weekly or monthly and will
store in my firebox!


--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 02-17-2011, 11:45 AM
Patrick O'Callaghan
 
Default backing up shadow files with rsync?

On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 18:14 +1030, Tim wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 20:48 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > You pays your money and you takes your choice. If you want every
> > backup of your 10GB home directory to take up another 10GB of space,
> > go for it. Most people don't actually want that. They assume (naively
> > or not) that the backup medium is itself sufficiently reliable, for
> > example I'm doing it on a NAS configured with mirrored disks, which is
> > fine for my purposes. YMMV of course.
>
> In my case, I was being diligent and backing up things to one of those
> external USB drives, and the external drive turned out to be a lemon,
> while the originals are all quite fine. I didn't buy an unusual brand
> of disc, either, it was a Seagate. I'd always been impressed by them,
> before. On the other hand, every Western Digital drive I had, and
> friends, lasted little more than a year or two.

Ironically, the NAS disk that failed was a 1TB Seagate unit. OTOH I've
(touch wood) had good results with WD Caviar Black disks.

poc

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 02-17-2011, 02:30 PM
Alan Evans
 
Default backing up shadow files with rsync?

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 4:45 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> Ironically, the NAS disk that failed was a 1TB Seagate unit. OTOH I've
> (touch wood) had good results with WD Caviar Black disks.

My experience also. I've had a few Seagate Barracuda disks die on me
in just the last couple of months. I've had really good results with
WD Caviar Black. None have failed so far...

-Alan
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:38 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org