Hello
Thinking of setup a backup process between two Centos systems. One will backup to the other one. For those people out there with Centos production severs what would you recommend to use
Samba or NFS
What is the most common and simple to use?
Many thanks in advance
Alfredo
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 05:43:46PM -0500, Alfredo Perez wrote:
Hello
Thinking of setup a backup process between two Centos systems. One will backup to the other one. For those people out there with Centos production severs what would you recommend to use
Do you mean you want the backup machine to be essentially a copy of the main machine? Or do you mean you just want to store backup files on the backup machine?
Samba or NFS
Samba or NFS??? No
To do the first - maintain a copy of the first machine on the backup machine, use rsync and ssh for 'authentication' and data transmission.
For the other, keeping backup files on the other machine, use dump(8) over the net to the files on the backup machine.
What is the most common and simple to use?
As above.
////jerry
Many thanks in advance
Alfredo
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Thanks, I think I was trying to kill a fly with a Bazuca
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Jerry McAllister jerrymc@msu.edu wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 05:43:46PM -0500, Alfredo Perez wrote:
Hello
Thinking of setup a backup process between two Centos systems. One will backup to the other one. For those people out there with Centos production severs what would you recommend to use
Do you mean you want the backup machine to be essentially a copy of the main machine? Or do you mean you just want to store backup files on the backup machine?
Samba or NFS
Samba or NFS??? No
To do the first - maintain a copy of the first machine on the backup machine, use rsync and ssh for 'authentication' and data transmission.
For the other, keeping backup files on the other machine, use dump(8) over the net to the files on the backup machine.
What is the most common and simple to use?
As above.
////jerry
Many thanks in advance
Alfredo
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 2/11/2011 5:01 PM, Alfredo Perez wrote:
Thanks, I think I was trying to kill a fly with a Bazuca
Someone already mentioned rsync for copies, but if you want to keep a longer history of backups online you might like backuppc. http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/11/2011 5:01 PM, Alfredo Perez wrote:
Thanks, I think I was trying to kill a fly with a Bazuca
Someone already mentioned rsync for copies, but if you want to keep a longer history of backups online you might like backuppc. http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Or "rsnapshot", which is very lightweight and works very well. If you have security concerns, you can also use "rssh" woith it.
I find it very useful to rsnapshot to an NFS server, which my users can then access with their normal privileges to recover files without my having to load tapes or install backup clients for them.
At Fri, 11 Feb 2011 17:43:46 -0500 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote:
Hello
Thinking of setup a backup process between two Centos systems. One will backup to the other one. For those people out there with Centos production severs what would you recommend to use
Samba or NFS
What is the most common and simple to use?
Many thanks in advance
There is little reason to use Samba between two *UNIX* (Linux) systems. NFS is more seamlessly integrated in UNIX systems.
OTOH, for mere backup using rsync and ssh might work even better and be somewhat simplier.
Alfredo
MIME-Version: 1.0
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 02/11/11 5:12 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
OTOH, for mere backup using rsync and ssh might work even better and be somewhat simplier.
except that provides no point in time restoration ability.
I prefer backup schemes that use dump/restore to do occasional full and regular incremental backups, and for these, NFS is quite useful.
On Friday, February 11, 2011 08:14:54 pm John R Pierce wrote:
On 02/11/11 5:12 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
OTOH, for mere backup using rsync and ssh might work even better and be somewhat simplier.
except that provides no point in time restoration ability.
I prefer backup schemes that use dump/restore to do occasional full and regular incremental backups, and for these, NFS is quite useful.
Not quite as simple as a dump restore, but duplicity works beatifully for point in time backups...
Peter.
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 8:14 PM, John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
On 02/11/11 5:12 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
OTOH, for mere backup using rsync and ssh might work even better and be somewhat simplier.
except that provides no point in time restoration ability.
I prefer backup schemes that use dump/restore to do occasional full and regular incremental backups, and for these, NFS is quite useful.
rsnapshot is a perl script wrapper for rsync. Works *beautifully* to provide hardlinked temporal snapshot repositories, I've used it effectively for years.
dump/restore is also deprecated because it's reading the raw fileystem, and modern Linux (such as CentOS 5.x) does a lot of paging. So data that is still paged out yet, and not yet written to disk, is not backed up correctly and likely to be corrupt. Definitely switch to tar, or star if you need SELinux permissions backed up, to write to disk or for temporal snapshots of your OS.
Rsync, unfortunately, has issues with SELinux restoration in my experience.
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 07:54:17AM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 8:14 PM, John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
On 02/11/11 5:12 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
OTOH, for mere backup using rsync and ssh might work even better and be somewhat simplier.
except that provides no point in time restoration ability.
I prefer backup schemes that use dump/restore to do occasional full and regular incremental backups, and for these, NFS is quite useful.
rsnapshot is a perl script wrapper for rsync. Works *beautifully* to provide hardlinked temporal snapshot repositories, I've used it effectively for years.
dump/restore is also deprecated because it's reading the raw fileystem, and modern Linux (such as CentOS 5.x) does a lot of paging. So data that is still paged out yet, and not yet written to disk, is not backed up correctly and likely to be corrupt. Definitely switch to tar, or star if you need SELinux permissions backed up, to write to disk or for temporal snapshots of your OS.
dump/restore deprecated??? Sounds like your own personal pronouncement. dump/restore is very actively used.
Rsync, unfortunately, has issues with SELinux restoration in my experience.
SELinux has lots of issues with lots of things making its value suspect.
////jerry
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Jerry McAllister jerrymc@msu.edu wrote:
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 07:54:17AM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 8:14 PM, John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
On 02/11/11 5:12 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
OTOH, for mere backup using rsync and ssh might work even better and be somewhat simplier.
except that provides no point in time restoration ability.
I prefer backup schemes that use dump/restore to do occasional full and regular incremental backups, and for these, NFS is quite useful.
rsnapshot is a perl script wrapper for rsync. Works *beautifully* to provide hardlinked temporal snapshot repositories, I've used it effectively for years.
dump/restore is also deprecated because it's reading the raw fileystem, and modern Linux (such as CentOS 5.x) does a lot of paging. So data that is still paged out yet, and not yet written to disk, is not backed up correctly and likely to be corrupt. Definitely switch to tar, or star if you need SELinux permissions backed up, to write to disk or for temporal snapshots of your OS.
dump/restore deprecated??? Sounds like your own personal pronouncement. dump/restore is very actively used.
So are rsh and telnet. This does not prevent their well justified deprecation. Even Linus Torvalds and RedHat have deprecated dump/restore, and the advent of ext3 with journaling and ext4 with the write-to-disk operations delayed up to a minute make the risks even greater. There's a decent synopsis of the problem at:
http://dump.sourceforge.net/isdumpdeprecated.html
Rsync, unfortunately, has issues with SELinux restoration in my experience.
SELinux has lots of issues with lots of things making its value suspect.
////jerry
Well, yes, it's an ongoing issue. "star" works well to propagate those settings, and is useful for storing backups with the corect SELinux information for restoration. rsync, tar, and dump/restore do *NOT*, at least on CentOS 5.x
On 2/12/11 6:54 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
OTOH, for mere backup using rsync and ssh might work even better and be somewhat simplier.
except that provides no point in time restoration ability.
I prefer backup schemes that use dump/restore to do occasional full and regular incremental backups, and for these, NFS is quite useful.
rsnapshot is a perl script wrapper for rsync.
So is backuppc (plus it can also use use tar, smb, or ftp to collect the files).
Works *beautifully* to provide hardlinked temporal snapshot repositories, I've used it effectively for years.
Backuppc can compress the files and also pools all duplicate content with hardlinks even if found on different machines. And it provides a nice web interface to browse and restore backups either by downloading through the browser or copying back to the source machine. The web interface can restrict the view of a user to only certain machines so users can do their own restores and control the configuration for their own machines.
On 02/12/2011 10:57 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 2/12/11 6:54 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
OTOH, for mere backup using rsync and ssh might work even better and be somewhat simplier.
except that provides no point in time restoration ability.
I prefer backup schemes that use dump/restore to do occasional full and regular incremental backups, and for these, NFS is quite useful.
rsnapshot is a perl script wrapper for rsync.
So is backuppc (plus it can also use use tar, smb, or ftp to collect the files).
Works *beautifully* to provide hardlinked temporal snapshot repositories, I've used it effectively for years.
Backuppc can compress the files and also pools all duplicate content with hardlinks even if found on different machines. And it provides a nice web interface to browse and restore backups either by downloading through the browser or copying back to the source machine. The web interface can restrict the view of a user to only certain machines so users can do their own restores and control the configuration for their own machines.
I use backuppc in all our offices.
You can even allow users to pull files back to their own machines if you like (they can only see their machine when they login). Access to the backups is via a normal file system tree after you pick the backup.
The web interface is very easy to use.
I love it.
-
Alexander Georgiev -
Alfredo Perez -
Jerry McAllister -
John R Pierce -
Johnny Hughes -
Les Mikesell -
Nico Kadel-Garcia -
Peter A -
Robert Heller