On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Auke Jilderda wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2002 at 12:19:11PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> >
> > Read the following page, then modify the associated script to your
> > system. It's geared toward tape. For drive-to-drive, I'd suggest rsync
> > rather than tar.
> Why?
that would depend ...
-- what is the purpose of your backups ??
- if for "saving files" to restore at a later time if needed ?
- for keeping a live copy of the existing server
for posible warm swap upon failure ??
-- most of the good and bad features apply to both...with a few exceptions
tar
- my preference ...
- i can save a copy of what was transfered from master to "backup"
- i can compress 6-12 months of backups into 1 disk of same size
as master disk ( nope... i dont have a disk full of video clips )
possible bad stuff
- files might require untarring on the other end
( i'll pay this "trivial" price for the above additional benefit
rsync
- live copy of master to slave
possible bad stuff
- if the master erased foo.txt, the backup will also be erased
- good if the backup is also erased, if you wanted the clones
to also delete what is no longer on the master disk
- you might not be able to rebuild a master from the rsync backups??
- rsync seems to hit a "transfer limit" when trying to rsync
600GB between 2 machines... it dies... but tar worked fine
- probably flaky nic drivers or mb or ??
- other systems have no problem transferring similar sized
transfers between multiple machines
-- lots o ways to skin the cat... just between tar and rsync only..
c ya
alvin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
