[CentOS] Bacula

[Bryan Cardillo]

On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 10:38:09AM -0400, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 at 10:25am, James B. Byrne wrote
> 
> > We are presently looking into alternative backup strategies for our 
> > networked servers and are considering Bacula.  Does anyone have any 
> > opinions on this application, good and bad, to share?  Further, is 
> > there a CentOS4 specific rpm build available for this in a yum 
> > repository (I note that CentOS4 tags have been added to the Bacula 
> > source tree)?
> 
> I'm a long time amanda user, so I may be a bit biased.  I looked into 
> bacula a month or so ago for 2 reasons -- 1) tape spanning support (which 
> amanda has only in experimental patches, and 2) native ACL support (amanda 
> uses native tools like tar or dump to actually get the bits off the disk, 
> so ACL support is up to them).  I decided against bacula pretty quickly, 
> though, because the scheduling facilities of it are, well, non-existent.  
> You have to make all the scheduling decisions yourself.

        I've also used amanda in the past, and looked into bacula
        for the tape spanning support as well.  However, I was not
        turned off by having to setup the schedules manually, and
        have been using bacula for several months to backup ~15TB.
        Aside from the tape spanning support (which I think is
        maturing in amanda), I've found having the catalog in a true
        database to be a great feature, particularly when a user
        inevitably request files (the names of which they only
        vaguely remember) be restored.

        Cheers,
        Bryan Cardillo
        Penn Bioinformatics Core
        University of Pennsylvania