[ILUG] WAS OT: , now which backup solution

[Paul Jakma]

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, John P. Looney wrote:

> No concept of quotas.

Usually not needed. You *want* to back up everything you marked for 
backup.

However, when you provide backups as a service to clients. I can see 
why you'd want that.

> No good way of doing on-client encryption.

That's a difficult one.

> No concept of multi-user.

?

> No friendly backup/restore interface for newbies.

Ah, true.

> No windows client. Crap file searching tool when you do want to 
> backup. It's very inefficent for backing up to disk (it spools to 
> disk, then writes to a FILE: device that is disk, pretending to be 
> tape.

Ah. Well, yes, that's a consequence of the spool then send to tape 
model. Can you not set spool to nothing? No way around it?

> When you do restore from disk, it searches serially through the 
> file like a big tarball, rather than an indexed file.

That's cause they /are/ tarballs though. Amanda being deliberately 
designed to not care much which underlying archiver is used means you 
could invent your own, or just improve tar to maintain indices and 
amanda automatically would benefit, no?

(though, Amanda does it keep its own indices for searches so you can 
find which tape holds what. But thats /before/ you restore. No idea 
how efficient that is.)

> john

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	paul at clubi.ie	paul at jakma.org	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
The soul would have no rainbow had the eyes no tears.