I manage my offsite disaster-recovery backup (which is rsync'd over the net) by:
+ Creating a directory of links that point only to the most recent full and incremental for each host. (Incrementals always go against the last full.)
+ rsync each host directory individually. This breaks dedupe between hosts, but it's a compromise against rsync not handling the huge file list well.
+ Makes a tarball of the current backuppc config and copies it to the offsite, so there's always copy of the config "in the clear", with documentation on how to bring backuppc up on the remote box.
So my offsite backup always contains the most recent backup image. It's not a "drop in place" snapshot, but it's up to date and contains all the information necessary to quickly bring backuppc up on the offsite box, but doesn't contain unnecessary incrementals or older fulls. My offsite is about 1.8 TB, my local is 2.6 TB.
I have scripts I can share.
On 06/26/2012 12:33 PM, Timothy J Massey wrote:
> shorvath <backuppc-forum@...> wrote on 06/26/2012 01:02:00 PM:
> > I wouldn't want to rsync /var/lib/backuppc as this is not in a
> > format that can be readily used.
> > What I'm after is a ready to use snapshot, As it looks on the
> > server I'm backing up or what it would look like if using the
> > archive host feature but just not in tar format.
> While I'm at it, another point: you say that you want a snapshot. Great: I think you should have a snapshot, too.
> Unfortunately, BackupPC does not provide snapshots. It provides files. Under most circumstances (and under Windows, under *all* circumstances), BackupPC is not going to allow you to do a bare-metal restore, and certainly not easily. Frankly, asking it to is a lot to ask. But it does a tremendous job of allowing you to back up huge collections of individual files, as well as keeping an entire history of those files, all in a space-optimized way.
> There *are* tools that do a great job of snapshots, including bare-metal restore. However, they won't easily allow you to restore a single file, and won't allow you to keep multiple copies of your data efficiently. Clonezilla is a good one to look at. Using LVM snapshots is another. If you're using virtualized hosts, your virtualization engine should have snapshot capabilities already (and snapshots are one of the best reasons to be using virtualization in the first place).
> File-level and snapshot backups are complementary. There is some overlap, but one does not cover everything that the other does. One is a hammer, one is a screwdriver. Use the right tool for the job.
> Tim Massey
Carl D Cravens (ccravens@...), Ext 228 (620.327.1228)
Lead System Administrator