backup

[Les Mikesell]

Tom Holroyd wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-03-19 at 17:24 -0400, Tom Holroyd wrote:
>> Show of hands: compress backups? Or 1:1 copy.
> 
> Summary. More than 2:1 favor 1:1. If you do compress, compressing the
> entire backup is bogus, it should be done file by file, and preferably
> by the backup device.
> 
> The interesting news is backup verification. I typically look at the
> file sizes and go, "yeah, it ran." Prob'ly not good enough.

Backuppc keeps only one linked copy for all instances of the same file 
that appear - but full runs will replace any changed content.  Even if 
use rsync and tell it to cache it's block checksums to improve speed, it 
will still compare a certain percentage of the stored file contents on 
each run.

> Also, one can argue in favor of FEC for archival storage, so if you lose
> a track or set of blocks you can still recover. I backup to RAID.

I mirror the whole backuppc filesystem to disks that are rotated 
offsite.  I'd like to have something like the zfs incremental 
block-level send/receive instead, though.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com