steve:
haha! this how they usually start - but oh well - yeah - i do prefer
something more automated actually - and snazzier interfaces don't hurt much
either. the less time that i have to take out writing scripts and code and
other junk while still maintaining an acceptable level of performance and
stability - and actually getting down the nitty gritty of working or playing
is mostly what attracts me to whatever products i use.
-josh tiner
e-mail: josh.tiner@worldwidephp.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "steve" <steve@itcom.net>
To: <slug@nks.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 11:02 PM
Subject: Re: [SLUG] Re: backup of linux files
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Hmm, robust. What problems have you seen with tar, or do you mean you
prefer
> something more, eh, automated. Snazzier interface? I'm not trying to start
a
> flame war, just curious of your point view as tar is the all time most
used
> backup util under unix, and I've never seen any problems with it...
>
> I've used both Arkeia and Amanda. Actually still use Amanda for 40G backup
> every night. Arkeia was easier to get started but once I got into several
> different type of servers I bailed, possibly because they started to
charge
> and I wanted to use all open source. (Not 100% sure...)
>
> As for Amanda it backs up to an internal drive and then moves it onto DLT.
If
> there's tape problems it a copy on the drive until the tape is working
again,
> pretty handy. Also uses multiple "channels" to backup several machines at
the
> same time.
>
> On Saturday 16 February 2002 21:59, you wrote:
> > That's find to backup that way if you are only doing just a few dirs -
or
> > just like a monthly or incremental backup - but if you have a serious
> > backup schedule for your computer or network - it's good to have
something
> > a bit more robust than that IMHO.
> >
> > -Josh
> >
[snip]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 16:14:42 EDT