Nils Breunese nils at
Tue Jun 5 20:21:18 UTC 2007

Mike McGrath wrote:

> So I had a fire lit under my butt to get going on the backups
> situation.  Here's what we're currently using:
> BackupPC.  Run nightly.  Over SSH.  Selective backups.
> I'd like to move to bacula. Now that we have moved all the storage off
> of xen6 we can start to move backups there.  It has more storage then
> lockbox does so I'd also like to do full backups.  I've installed bacula
> from the review and I'll be testing with it and doing a review shortly.

I'm a very happy BackupPC 3.0 user (backing up ~15 full servers daily and
keeping 2 weeks worth for every one, around 700 GB of data, but due to
BackupPC's pooling and compression features it all fits on a 200 GB

I'm just wondering why we'd use Bacula over BackupPC. In my experience
BackupPC is much easier to setup and much easier to use (the web interface
to BackupPC is simply brilliant). It seemed to me Bacula is more geared
towards tape backups (though you can use disk with 'virtual tapes') and
BackupPC is more geared towards disk-based backup (though you can
frequently write archives to tape). I also found Bacula's Brief Tutorial
(<>) to be not so

Nils Breunese.

More information about the Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list