Hi all of you,

I have a small Linux network around 35 machine .I plan for Backup server .
I searched on google for free open source Backup software then I found following 2 .
(i)Amanda
(ii)Bacula

Please suggest me which one is best for my network and if you know about another
one then please suggest me the name .

Thanks for your ideas
Nkjha

I would really recommend using bacula.
It is a very professional product, has alot of features and even allows for data deduplication from 5.x.

In the beginning it might be a bit tricky, but it really pays off.

I would really recommend using Amanda.

Really, both products have a loyal following. I like to support Amanda and help out people who are using Amanda, but I don't like getting caught up in arguments here. It's not quite comparable to favorite distro arguments, but it is similar.

If you want to check out Amanda, here are a couple of links to get started: http://amanda.zmanda.com/, http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/Main_Page (note that there is an Amanda Quick Start guide, which provides perhaps the best way of getting set up initially), http://blogs.umass.edu/choogend/2007...-about-amanda/, http://code.v.igoro.us/archives/50-W...s-Backups.html.

While there are many many backup applications and scripts, as far as I know Amanda and Bacula are the only two free open source enterprise level network backup applications. If you want a more general coverage of backup issues, you should check out W. Curtis Preston's Backup & Recovery published by O'Reilly and the companion website, BackupCentral.

The only reason I usually don't recommend Amanda is that it still relies upon Samba if you are dealing with Windows clients, unless things have changed. I try to strip Samba from environments I work in, especially when you are working in mixed environments but don't use Samba. Bacula includes windows clients without the use of Samba.

I also like Bacula's catalog that is database driven, with support of MySQL, PostgreSQL and several others.

See, that's just it: "unless things have changed." (And without any time reference - "since 200x?"). Apparently you haven't followed Amanda development for at least a couple of years. There has been an unbelievable amount of development work. If you choose to look, http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/Main_Page shows a couple of major releases in the last year, with very significant feature additions. For an in depth look at some specific topics, see http://code.v.igoro.us/categories/6-amanda. If you check community downloads, you'll find a Windows client on the list here: http://www.zmanda.com/download-amanda.php, for example.

It's fine that you have a backup program you like. Just don't make comparison's that are so badly out of date.

Actually I did visit their Wiki page, they should update their requirements page then that still claims it needs or uses Samba.

http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/Ins...s_Requirements

The top of that page says: "Amanda can optionally make use of the following packages", note the word "optionally." Amanda provides a lot of options. For example, you can backup using ufsdump, gnutar, star, zfs send, etc., etc.

The link to the "Backup client" page (in the piece you quoted) takes us to a page where it says, "Amanda is able to back up Microsoft Windows filesystems by using Samba, a package that implements a SMB client and server for Unix or using Zmanda Windows Client, native Win32 Amanda client."

That link to the "Zmanda Windows Client" takes us to a page where it says, "Zmanda Windows Client Community Edition is an Amanda client for Windows platform that uses native Win32 API and uses Volume Shadow Services (VSS) for backup."

Now, I grant you that some of that could be a bit more telegraphed at the top, but it is community documentation. A wiki. Volunteer labor. So, OK, I'll volunteer and go add a word or two to emphasize that there is a choice and you aren't stuck with only samba. It's an option.

On the other hand, the native Windows client is something that has been discussed repeatedly on the users list, in the forums, and is mentioned in several other places in the web pages. It's been around for a while.