[CentOS] Backup server
tindall.satwth at brandxmail.com
Wed Jan 13 19:29:46 UTC 2010
On Wed, 2010-01-13 at 10:03 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 1/13/2010 9:04 AM, John Doe wrote:
> > One thing that made me not use BackupPC was that (from the doc):
> > "The advantage of the mod_perl setup is that no setuid script is needed,
> > and there is a huge performance advantage.... The
> > typical speedup is around 15 times."
> > Since I don't have a dedicated backup server, I did not want to mess up the existing apache configurations...
> You really don't spend any time in the web interface which is the only
> thing affected by this. And it is fast enough when run as a normal CGI
> anyway. Try it without mod_perl. You'd also have the option of running
> backuppc as apache, but that is less secure if other web admins have
> access to the machine.
As a side note, the epel BackupPC package does NOT use mod_perl by
default and the centos-testing package does use mod_perl by default.
I run the centos-testing package (with mod_perl) and the epel package
with and without mod_perl usage and see no practical advantage of using
BackupPC with mod_perl in terms of time/cycle usage.
So just use the stock epel package and you don't need to modify apache.
More information about the CentOS