Les Mikesell wrote: > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 9:52 AM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: >>>> >>> Have you tried backuppc? There are some tradeoffs because it makes an >>> extra hardlink into a pool directory tree where the name is a hash of >>> the content, but it takes care of all the other stuff for you and >>> would let you store a much longer history, especially if there are >>> duplicate copies of any of the files spread around. >> >> I don't think that's going to happen. First, we have an in-house >> developed backup system that works just fine. Second, we *are* backup up something >> over a hundred servers and workstations to a few backup servers. Third, >> we are talking, in some cases, of terabytes.... > > I'm not quite at that scale in a single instance myself, but I'm > fairly sure many users on the backuppc mail list are, so it is not > necessarily a problem, although there are some tradeoffs with extra > overhead for compression and the extra pool hardlink. In any case it > is trivial to install and test with the package in EPEL. Even if it > doesn't replace your server backup system you might find it useful to > point at some workstations or windows boxes (it can use smb as well as > rsync or tar to gather the files). > Heh. We don't do Windows. That's desktop support.... (As a side note, I work for a federal contractor at a non-defense site, so scale is, um, larger than many.) mark -- This email reflects my opinions, and not those of my employer, the US federal government, or the view out of my manager's window....