On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 02:02:25 -0700 Ian L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hey Ian,
> well it seemed like a bad idea to commit ourselves to using a backup drive > for which buying new tapes would probably not be possible, plus if the > drive bit the dust, we wouldnt have access to any of our backups. It seemed > like a really nice drive. I was hoping they'd recover, but doesnt look like it. This seems like a smart business decision, given the critical nature of backups. > how do i rejoin the tar files? make one big file out of them : cat tarfiles* > big.tar or to extract them directly : cat tarfiles* | tar -xvf - > > I might approach this differently. Right now i have one machine which is > acting a backup server. I have a few other machines which mount to a > directory on the backup server. To avoid this 2gb limit (upgrading nfs on > multiple machines all running different version of redhat doesnt seem > feasible :) i think i might mount all the machine directories directly on > the backup server, and run tar from there. That'll avoid the file size > limitation since i wont be writing to an NFS mount that way. If you're _reading_ across NFS you'll still bump into the limit. RedHat 9 has v3 and IIRC so do all RedHat releases going back to 7.1. You might want to look at rsync to reduce the amount of network traffic needed to do a backup, or even consider a network backup solution like Amanda. Good Luck, Sean. -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
