Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

What Software Do You Use for Unix Backups?

Posted by Cliff on from the finding-the-right-tool-for-the-job dept.

jregel asks: "Linus has stated that dump should not be considered a reliable backup program, and both tar and cpio have their limitations. So what are Slashdot readers doing for backing up Linux servers and workstations? (you do backup, right?)" Given this bit of news, have you used anything other than the standard Unix staple to back up your Linux boxes? If you were forced off of tar, cpio and dump, what would you use as a replacement?

5 of 212 comments (clear)

  1. No good answer by Yonder+Way · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Amanda comes up a lot. They can't span tapes.

    Veritas also comes up a lot. Aside from cost, did you know Veritas can't back up single files larger than 2GB in size on Linux clients?

    On paper, BRU looks pretty darned good. I haven't yet put that theory into practice.

  2. Why not fix dump and/or Linux? by Dahan · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Dump has been the standard Unix backup program for decades... I don't use Linux, but if I did, I'd consider it a bug that dump didn't work properly.

    Seems to me that Linus (or another kernel hacker) should fix the ext2 race condition reported in that thread, rather than blithely dismiss the problem with, "dump was a stupid program in the first place."

  3. Re:afbackup by AlexA · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you overwrite the previous day's backup, what happens if the server crashes and loses all its data while the backup is in progress? It seems to me that you'd lose up to a week's worth of data if you switch tapes once a week, unless you actually append data to the end of the tape instead of overwriting it. But, as mentioned in the link you posted, appending data to the end of the tape isn't all so great either, plus you increase the chances of running out of tape, in which case you have to switch tapes anyway.

  4. Re:I cannot be forced off tar by mcelrath · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The horrible problem with linux right now though is that because the memory management is so braindead, that backup will swap out everything in memory in favor of caching your multi-gigabyte backup file. Thus your method brings the machine to a standstill while the backup is occuring (which can take hours to days depending on the size of your filesystem).

    Not a criticism of your method (in fact, I use this), just a rant that the Linux MM system NEEDS TO BE FIXED. I'm sick of watching as some trivial process that will only read or write once gets the whole filesystem cached for it while programs I'm using interactively get swapped to disk. Video recording and playing programs (mplayer, ogle) have the same problem.

    Let's hope 2.6 is better than 2.4. Can any kernel hackers comment on this? In 2.5 will tar cvjf /home /mnt/backup/home.tar.bz2 bring my system to its knees?

    -- Bob

    --
    1^2=1; (-1)^2=1; 1^2=(-1)^2; 1=-1; 1=0.
  5. Problems... by hafree · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The problem with most suggestions here is that it seems the average slashdot reader is a linux hobbyist or works as the IT manager for a small office that happens to run linux. What happens when you need to backup 6TB/night and don't want to pay someone to sit around swapping tapes all night. Sometimes it just isn't practical to purchase another SAN solution to facilitate an rsync. Or what if you have a collection of high capacity LTO tape drives at your disposal, but don't have the budget for something larger and automated, or smaller with an autoloader. I think automation and efficiency is almost as important as reliability and cost. Not everyone can afford a Storagetek Powderhorn Silo, or needs the versatility of expensive products such as Veritas Netbackup. Then again, sometimes tar or rsync just don't cut it in an enterprise environment where data is mission critical.