Linux - ServerThis forum is for the discussion of Linux Software used in a server related context.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
So i have an issue, i have lots of Windows Machines running windows XP and windows 7, and i want a way to back them up to our Fedora 8/12 server. i will the server to control the backup now the windows machines
I use Bacula to backup my Windows machines to a Linux server. You can find Bacula at www.bacula.org.
I tried Amanda. My only concern was that, at the time, Amanda did not append to tapes. It required a new tape for each backup session. I don't know if that is still the case.
The down side of Bacula is that the configuration is a bit involved. It takes a while to understand the options. On the other hand, it is a stable, reliable product. I have been able to restore my files when I need to.
Distribution: Solaris 9 & 10, Mac OS X, Ubuntu Server
Posts: 1,197
Rep:
I believe that is still technically true (Amanda appending to tapes); and, in principle, I agree with the reasons it was done that way. I believe in redundancy, and putting all your eggs on one tape reduces redundancy.
However, with modern tapes having higher capacity and costing more and . . .
One of the departments I manage backups for has a very very tight budget. Took me a couple of years to get a tape library, even though they agreed it was desperately needed, and we were running off the end of dds/3 tapes all that time. Anyway, they couldn't buy enough tapes to fill the library, or to keep a tape for each weekday going back any number of weeks. So, I configured Amanda to do incrementals only and keep them on the holding disk during the week. Then on weekends I do a force full and flush everything out to tape. With that configuration, I only use one tape a week (AIT5), and I can have a couple of months of backups online with the library. That's all automated, by the way. Once set up, it just runs. I never have to worry about it, other than to do periodic tests to make sure it is working. I get daily emails with the results and status.
With my other departments, I didn't see the need of wasting tapes on weekends. So, I did exactly the reverse. I run incrementals only on weekends, and keep them on the holding disk. Then I let Amanda flush everything to tape on Monday and manage the backup levels through the week, so that full backups are distributed through the week and level out the load on the backup system.
With the newer Amanda and its API's, there is even more flexibility; and, I believe, they are developing an option to append to tapes. I wouldn't count on that until it's out, and it's not something I want to use; but, there are enough people who do want it that it has been discussed repeatedly.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.