From: Adam G. <mai...@we...> - 2008-03-06 13:02:17
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote: > On 03/06 08:56 , cedric briner wrote: >>> Yes it's possible. >>> However, it's generally so much work >> you mean human work ? > > yes; tho if you're just copying a subset of the backed-up hosts, it ends up > being a lot of computer work due to all the hardlinks. > > if you want to copy the entire backuppc data pool, this is a much more > tractable problem. don't copy it at the file level; copy it at the > filesystem level with dd+netcat, then grow the filesystem to the size of the > new disk. (this is one more reason why /var/lib/backuppc _*really*_ should > be a separate filesystem). dd will copy the data in time it takes to read > all the bits off the disk; anything that operates at the file level (tar, > rsync, cp) will take several times longer, because it ends up seeking all > over the disk to follow the hardlinks. > > Your original question was about copying a subset of the hosts which have > been backed up, tho. :) Depending on the size of the original pool and the new servers disk space, it might make more sense to take this approach: 1) Copy the entire pool/etc using dd+netcat or similar 2) Delete all the hosts that you do NOT want to keep (rm -rf pc/host1 pc/host2 pc/host3 etc 3) Run the backuppc_nightly to purge the pool of all the files you do not need to keep. This might be easier, of course, if the original backup server has 5TB of storage and the new one only has 2TB, then it doesn't work for you, but hopefully that isn't the case. Regards, Adam -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHz+kZGyoxogrTyiURAlw+AJ93Fed93Fy9AejhXzUHyB6GI8UA5wCgmBwd /RL0AVftv/seQiQ5NLg8mhI= =cXtN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |