<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Sounds good to me, I really like the pooling method and I have not had
any problems with restoring or backing up. <br>
Mark<br>
<br>
Les Mikesell wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid1153584001.20825.11.camel@les-home.futuresource.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Sat, 2006-07-22 at 09:37, Mark Gumprecht wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I had to do some reading to to understand the reply.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.mikerubel.org/computers/rsync_snapshots/">http://www.mikerubel.org/computers/rsync_snapshots/</a> . I also came
across rsnapshot . That looks like what I want, my only concern is when
I'm away and my GUI only users need to recover files, they probable
won't be able to. After googling there seems to be a gui called grsync.
Mark
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Backuppc should be as efficient as these if you configure it
to use rsync over ssh as the transport. Just do the first
run over a weekend and make sure you have a plan to do a
full restore (physically take the backup server where you
need it, do an 'archivehost' tar dump to DVD's or a laptop,
rebuild on swappable drives, etc.). The current version
of backuppc needs to do full runs frequently but full
runs don't actually copy everything, they just turn on the
rsync option to to block compares on all files. This
takes some extra time/cpu but not a lot more bandwidth.
The next version (a beta is out) will do incremental runs
based on the contents of the last incremental so it won't
matter.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Mark Gumprecht
MSAD3
Unity, Maine 04988
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gumprechtm@msad3.org">gumprechtm@msad3.org</a></pre>
</body>
</html>