Greywolf wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2002, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> # [ On Saturday, October 12, 2002 at 18:16:04 (-0600), Rick Kelly wrote: ]
> # > Subject: Re: FYI: upgrading GNU tar
> # >
> # > Indeed, rmt is very important. I do remote dumps with both tar and
> # > dump. I have 15 systems and 2 tape drives.
> #
> # Maybe you might think about using Amanda.  It makes it easier to get
> # more reliable backups with guaranteed coverage of everything you deem
> # important, at the frequencies you deem important, and without really
> # increasing the complexity as the number of client systems increases.
> #
> # Amanda can also make finding the right tape to do restores much easier
> # too, and you can easily do restores across the network, though you're
> # not force to (nor are you forced to use amanda to do restores at all).
> #
> # Amanada uses its own network protocols and can internally use dump
> # and/or tar depending on your requirements.  (i.e. it's not reliant on
> # rmt support on either clients or servers.)  I think backup images can
> # easily be compressed before or after they cross the network too.
> 
> The problem with Amanda, IIRC, unless it has been fixed recently, is
> that Amanda does not support multi-volume dumps.  This is a shortcoming
> which needs to be addressed if it hasn't already.
> 
> I also see this problem with every program using "its own network
> protocols".  Why not make use of components which already exist?
> 
> Also, dump/restore's complexity also does not increase as the number
> of clients increases, really.  It just means finding a way of doing
> it for the systems (which, granted, Amanda does attempt to solve).
> 
> 				--*greywolf;
> --
> NetBSD: Are you old enough to run it?

Unless this has changed recently, AMANDA also can only support either
dump or GNU tar. I can't tell it to use something else oh a whim - like
'star' which is the best tar program available. It can also only use
gzip for compression - unless this has changed recently.

Also AMANDA security is a joke, and the whole system is too loose -
there's too much guessing done by the scheduler among other ad-hockery.
But so far it's been 'good enough' for me. What I am looking for is a
simple yet flexible site-wide backup tools, and yet to find them. Has
anyone tried afbackup?