Mike McGrath mmcgrath at
Tue Jun 5 21:40:14 UTC 2007

Nils Breunese wrote:
> Mike McGrath wrote:
>> We're starting to get into backup needs that will include a lot of data
>> thats not redundant so backuppc's pooling won't really benefit us that
>> much.
> Ok, fair enough. I thought there was talk of having static content on
> multiple servers, that's where BackupPC's pooling feature could come in
> pretty handy, but I have no idea about what amounts of data we're talking.
Yeah but over time thats become a much smaller percentage of our overall 
backup needs.  Our one-off binary files have grown much faster than our 
smaller static content files have.
>> Hopefully we'll be using both tape and disk backups.  Once our new disk
>> tray gets in we'll have to prepare to backup a couple TB of Binary
>> RPMs.  Some of our backups will be going to disk, some will be going to
>> tape.  Additionally it seems that bacula is more efficient at backing
>> things up.
> Efficient in term of what precisely? And what backend are we using with
> BackupPC right now?

In terms of how long it takes to do the backups and how much load it 
requires.  BackupPC is written in perl.


More information about the Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list