Which solution is better? - Unix

This is a discussion on Which solution is better? - Unix ; Hi I want to set up a back up system on my machine. The files I want to back up is about more than 6G big. And I will create a incremental back up solution. All the files are distributed ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Which solution is better?

  1. Which solution is better?

    Hi
    I want to set up a back up system on my machine. The files I want to
    back up is about more than 6G big. And I will create a incremental
    back up solution. All the files are distributed in more than 20
    directories. So, there are at least options here:
    1. Create only one tar file and snar file (the file used for gnu tar
    for increamental back up) of the home system.
    2. Create one tar and sanr file for each sub directories.

    I do not know which one is better. I want a low cost solution. I
    mean low cost solution as less back up time and less CPU usage and
    keeping the system running as normal as well as doing not bring the
    response speed for normal service.

    Thanks in advance! Any advice will be highly appreciated! Thanks
    again!

    Regards!
    Bo


  2. Re: Which solution is better?

    Bo Yang wrote:
    > Hi
    > I want to set up a back up system on my machine. The files I want to
    > back up is about more than 6G big. And I will create a incremental
    > back up solution. All the files are distributed in more than 20
    > directories. So, there are at least options here:
    > 1. Create only one tar file and snar file (the file used for gnu tar
    > for increamental back up) of the home system.
    > 2. Create one tar and sanr file for each sub directories.
    >
    > I do not know which one is better. I want a low cost solution. I
    > mean low cost solution as less back up time and less CPU usage and
    > keeping the system running as normal as well as doing not bring the
    > response speed for normal service.
    >
    > Thanks in advance! Any advice will be highly appreciated! Thanks
    > again!
    >
    > Regards!
    > Bo
    >


    One file is better.
    Less admin overhead -> less costs.


    --
    Michael Tosch @ hp : com

  3. Re: Which solution is better?

    On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:11:55 +0100, Michael Tosch wrote:
    > Bo Yang wrote:
    >> Hi
    >> So, there are at least options here:
    >> 1. Create only one tar file and snar file (the file used for gnu tar
    >> for increamental back up) of the home system.
    >> 2. Create one tar and sanr file for each sub directories.


    > One file is better.
    > Less admin overhead -> less costs.


    Many files is better. Smaller files -> quicker restores -> better
    control.

    As with so many other things, "it depends" is the answer. I find dump
    files very nice, as I can do an interactive restore and traverse the
    dump file as if I was in a filesystem, select what I want, and extract
    only that. The real answer is, instead of rolling your own, find a
    backup package that meets your needs and budget. amanda may fit this
    criteria.


  4. Re: Which solution is better?

    Dave Hinz writes:

    > only that. The real answer is, instead of rolling your own, find a
    > backup package that meets your needs and budget. amanda may fit this
    > criteria.


    Amanda usually requires quite a bit of karma to get up an running.
    When it is running it is _very_ nice to work with.

    --
    Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen

  5. Re: Which solution is better?

    On Oct 29, 5:42 pm, Bo Yang wrote:
    > Hi
    > I want to set up a back up system on my machine. The files I want to
    > back up is about more than 6G big. And I will create a incremental
    > back up solution. All the files are distributed in more than 20
    > directories. So, there are at least options here:
    > 1. Create only one tar file and snar file (the file used for gnu tar
    > for increamental back up) of the home system.
    > 2. Create one tar and sanr file for each sub directories.
    >
    > I do not know which one is better. I want a low cost solution. I
    > mean low cost solution as less back up time and less CPU usage and
    > keeping the system running as normal as well as doing not bring the
    > response speed for normal service.
    >
    > Thanks in advance! Any advice will be highly appreciated! Thanks
    > again!
    >
    > Regards!
    > Bo


    Depending on what you need ... try using rsync.
    kjteoh


  6. Re: Which solution is better?

    kjteoh@gmail.com :
    > On Oct 29, 5:42 pm, Bo Yang wrote:
    >> Hi
    >> I want to set up a back up system on my machine. The files I want to
    >> back up is about more than 6G big. And I will create a incremental
    >> back up solution. All the files are distributed in more than 20
    >> directories. So, there are at least options here:
    >> 1. Create only one tar file and snar file (the file used for gnu tar
    >> for increamental back up) of the home system.
    >> 2. Create one tar and sanr file for each sub directories.
    >>
    >> I do not know which one is better. I want a low cost solution. I
    >> mean low cost solution as less back up time and less CPU usage and
    >> keeping the system running as normal as well as doing not bring the
    >> response speed for normal service.
    >>
    >> Thanks in advance! Any advice will be highly appreciated! Thanks
    >> again!
    >>
    >> Regards!
    >> Bo

    >
    > Depending on what you need ... try using rsync.


    Rsync? Is that a back up tool? Thanks!

    Regards!
    Bo

  7. Re: Which solution is better?

    Michael Tosch :
    > Bo Yang wrote:
    >> Hi
    >> I want to set up a back up system on my machine. The files I want to
    >> back up is about more than 6G big. And I will create a incremental
    >> back up solution. All the files are distributed in more than 20
    >> directories. So, there are at least options here:
    >> 1. Create only one tar file and snar file (the file used for gnu tar
    >> for increamental back up) of the home system.
    >> 2. Create one tar and sanr file for each sub directories.
    >>
    >> I do not know which one is better. I want a low cost solution. I
    >> mean low cost solution as less back up time and less CPU usage and
    >> keeping the system running as normal as well as doing not bring the
    >> response speed for normal service.
    >>
    >> Thanks in advance! Any advice will be highly appreciated! Thanks
    >> again!
    >>
    >> Regards!
    >> Bo
    >>

    >
    > One file is better.
    > Less admin overhead -> less costs.


    With one file, the backup file will be more than 10G big. Does so big a
    file affect the speed of back up ? Or does such a big file make the
    backup process resource consuming?

    Regards!
    Bo

+ Reply to Thread