
Using Linux for Windows HD Snapshots? 94
DBordello asks: "Our company is currently backing up weekly to tape. I would like to begin taking snapshots of our NT 4.0 server. My first thought was a Linux box running an Open Source solution. My research shows that most Open Source applications to take snapshots assume that the backup target is Linux based. This presents a problem with mounting the NT 4.0 server. While I could mount the share with Samba, all of the backup applications do not provide options to backup a local mount. What do you guys use to snapshot your Windows network?"
hdup my friend (Score:5, Informative)
Mount your NT filesystem via samba, specify your mounted directories to backup, put a crontab entry, that should be it.
I use it daily to store a backup file on a the same host as the filesystem backuped - then fetching it using rsync with another machine for archival purposes.
Won't keep NT permissions automatically, you should backup relevant permission files for Windows (anybody knows what they are?)
Re:hdup my friend (Score:1)
Yes, part of the file system.
Re:hdup my friend (Score:2)
Drive Image (Score:2)
It is amazing, does exactly what you want, fits on a DOS7 boot floppy (make a boot floppy from a Win9x machine) and is really a great tool.
Only caveat : you have to have multiple partitions, and the partition you are writing the drive image to must be recognized by DOS7 (Win9x) ie. FAT or FAT32.
I generally build my machines with this in mind, my main partition is generally NTFS with a FAT32 partition large enough to hold the one I want to back up - Drive Image gene
Re:hdup my friend (Score:1)
NTFS support already in Linux (Score:2, Informative)
Nevermind my dumbass comment (Score:1)
Re:NTFS support already in Linux (Score:5, Informative)
Really, it's best to use a Windows backup utility, or to use dd or similar to back up a binary image of the partition(s) on the machine itself.
This is one of those places where it's better not to save a few bucks (unless you save those bucks by first migrating that server to a free OS).
Re:NTFS support already in Linux (Score:1, Informative)
It does, and now you know.
GI Joe (Score:1)
Re:NTFS support already in Linux (Score:2)
Re:NTFS support already in Linux (Score:2)
Is this a kernel patch? a program or what?
Re:NTFS support already in Linux (Score:1)
# mount -t ntfs
Of course you can add the mountpoint to your
Amanda or SMBTAR (Score:5, Informative)
Backup of Microsoft Windows machines happens via Samba shares of course, and it will run in agent or agentless mode.
Agent mode of course gives you things like bandwidth throttling and compression of the network bandwidth usage. Agentless mode and you can back up anything you can mount.
Typically you can have it use the smbtar(1) command (from Samba) to have it backup your windows machine.
One word: dd. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:One word: dd. (Score:2, Informative)
This often isn't the case.
No. (Score:4, Informative)
No. It just means that you have to make a partition of at least the same size on the new hard drive, as on the old one. The new hard drives are usually larger, so it's not a problem at all. First use dd to back up the partition and record it on a new hard drive using fdisk (or cfdisk if yu cannot use a simple CLItool) first to make a new partition of the same type and size, and then dd again to write the actual data. It's just that simple.
Re:No. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:No. (Score:2, Funny)
Of course. (Score:1)
Is that some kind of joke?
If the new hard drive is smaller then obviously you cannot write more data than what would fit. Isn't that obvious? If you want to move 40GB of backed up data to 30GB hard disk you are out of luck, no matter if you use dd or anything else. It's just a pigeon hole principle, pure and simple.
Re:Of course. (Score:2, Interesting)
No. I'm beginning to think you haven't worked with tools like ghost yet...
If I have a 220 GB HDD, but only 50 GB of data, and the drive explodes in flames and all I have left is a spare 80 GB drive, with your method, I'm screwed.
With something like ghost, you aren't. You just put the image on the new drive, and wait until you get some drive space. And, as an added benefit, you get complete defragmentation, too.
Re:Of course. (Score:1)
Re:Of course. (Score:1)
Does this work with ReiserFS, XFS, or any of the many other new non EXT filesystems?
Re:Of course. (Score:1)
I'm in a grumpy mood today. =P
Re:No. (Score:2)
Re:One word: dd. (Score:4, Insightful)
All I have to say on the subject of your choice of a screename is that people smart enough to be in mensa should be smart enough to not be in mensa.
Why, of course. (Score:1)
For the sake of simplicity I haven't piped it through gzip (or bzip2 for that matter) in my example. After all, it was only an example, for god's sake!
Re:Why, of course. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Why, of course. (Score:2)
Now if you had said it takes a LONG time to do it then I'd agree with you - I backed up a few of my HDDs this way and piping stuff to gzip sure makes it a lot slower. In some parts the read transfer rates drop to 7MB/sec on my Athlon 2000XP. I can't afford a processor that's twice as fast. Having a bigger backup HDD is cheaper - still, even setting gzip to lower compression settings doesn't make it as fast as I like - 90 minutes to back
Re:Why, of course. (Score:1)
at least smart enough to not be able to be in Mensa; he's saying
that Mensa is not well-regarded by smart people (which is true, as
a general rule), and so if you're really smart, you would probably
not be interested in their endorsement. This assumes, of course,
that all smart people have the same views in such matters, but I'll
leave the refutation of that supposition as an exercise.
Re:Why, of course. (Score:1)
One of these days you'll get your sig right. Someone with such a superior should learn to use a spell check.
Re:Why, of course. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:One word: dd. (Score:1)
Re:Strom Thurmond, Senator, dead at 100 (Score:3, Funny)
You could at least try to be on topic, you know. Saying something like, use dd and your hard drive images will last as long as Strom Thurmond. Or, you need to keep your Windows backups segregated from your Linux backups, just like Strom Thurmond would have done. C'mon, try it, it's fun.
Re:Strom Thurmond, Senator, dead at 100 (Score:1)
Ghost 4 Unix? (Score:4, Informative)
Not that I've used it extensively yet (maybe someone else has) but Ghost 4 Unix (g4u) will do a bit for bit copy just like Ghost for Windows does, difference being that it is freeware and backs up to any ftp server with the appropriate credentials added. I think I'll go ahead and try it a little more this weekend actually.
Here [feyrer.de] is a link to g4u.
Cliff
Re:Ghost 4 Unix? (Score:2)
Re:Ghost 4 Unix? (Score:2)
Re:Ghost 4 Unix? (Score:1)
Re:Ghost 4 Unix? (Score:1)
Re:Ghost 4 Unix? (Score:2)
Next time, read the info on the page listed in the post you are commenting on.
Re:Ghost 4 Unix? (Score:1)
Not that I've used it extensively yet (maybe someone else has) but Ghost 4 Unix (g4u) will do a bit for bit copy just like Ghost for Windows does, difference being that it is freeware and backs up to any ftp server with the appropriate credentials added.
My schwinn will do 20MP/H, just like a porsche does.
As far as having no relation, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell that 'ghost 4 unix' is a knockoff of the (now owned by norton) ghost.
Re:Ghost 4 Unix? (Score:1)
dd | gzip > file
Which is probably okay if your partition is full, but otherwise sucks. It doesn't even seem to bother trying to zero slack space on the disk first.
tar (Score:2)
Combine with compression programs such as gzip, bzip2, compress, etc., as needed.
rinse, lather, repeat.
Envy me ... (Score:3, Insightful)
A couple of weeks ago, I convinced my boss to let me replace our entire windows network (workstations; all servers are *nix) with diskless Linux workstations (Gentoo/OpenOffice/Evolution/Mozilla), all participating in a big happy openmosix cluster!!!
(our builds will be speedy-speedy now!!!)
So, my backup procedure will be:
Step 1)back up the NFS server with the users' home dirs
Step 2)Drink BEER!!!!
Re:Envy me ... (Score:1, Funny)
4) No profit.
BackupPC (Score:5, Informative)
Re:BackupPC (Score:2)
Damn, this looks REALLY REALLY cool. Thanks for the link!
Partimage (Score:5, Informative)
Partimage [partimage.org] makes an "intelligent" copy of a partition. I.e., it only copies the sectors that actually contain data. This gives a smaller backup than a full copy of the disk.
It can read NTFS partitions, and it can connect to a remote server to store the file.
They even provide bootable disk images, so you can use it without installing Linux on the NT machine.
Amanda (Score:2)
running via the cygwin port. A bit klunky but works for our servers.
All user data is *NOT* kept on the desktop so I don't about backing up the workstations.
Ghost for Unix (Score:2)
http://www.feyrer.de/g4u/
"g4u ("ghost for unix") is a NetBSD-based bootfloppy/CD-ROM that allows easy cloning of PC harddisks to deploy a common setup on a number of PCs using FTP. The floppy/CD offers two functions. First is to upload the compressed image of a local harddisk to a FTP server. Other is to restore that image via FTP, uncompress it and write it back to disk; network configuration is fetched via DHCP. As the harddisk is processed as a image, any filesyste
cgywin (Score:2)
very simple... and works.
Chief
Well i guess (Score:1)
Re:Well i guess (Score:2)
rather simple actually, (Score:2, Funny)
Dacula? (Score:3, Informative)
Just found it today, so I can't give any comments, but at least their claim is cool:
"It comes by night and sucks the vital essence from your computers."
Especially interesting would ba a comparison to Amanda [amanda.org].
Bye egghat.
Re:Dacula? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Dacula? (Score:2)
Bye egghat.
Re:Dacula? (Score:1)
unattended (Score:2, Interesting)
Not sure if it is what you are searching for though (it would not backup data)
BackupPC (Score:2)
BackupPC is what we use. It works with both Windows and Unix, and lets you view the archives through a web interface (matter of fact, you can control any aspect of the backup process via web OR command line, for users or scripts, however you prefer)
You can specify how many backups to keep and when to start deleting.
For each backup, it later goes through and compares files with the last backup. If any match, it removes the file and makes a hard link to the old file to save
Your definition of snapshots. (Score:2)
If you mean an image of the disk, when you say snapshot, then you will have to use something like partimage or ghost4unix. These will require that the NT4 server be shut down while the image is taken. The Norton Ghost for Servers can do live images.
If you mean you want a point in time copy of the server's files, when you say snapshot, then Rsync is your friend, with Samba client. Look at this [mikerubel.org]
Rsync, cygwin and cacls (Score:2)
You will lose ACLs, but you can do what we do (we use ACLs on XFS), dump them to file just before you run your snapshot (we use getfacl, but you could use the cacls tool on NT), allowing your file dump of the ACLs to be synced also. You can then apply the ACLs either after you have restored.
Th
how about this! (Score:2)
it's simple (Score:1)
then..um...take the tape and put it in a linux box to....um...have an open source "solution"
Windows Server Snapshots (Score:2)
Well, right before I got fired, I used a Canon G2 digital camera. I used to use a Fugi Finepix, but it didn't give me enough control over my Windows Snapshots. So one day our mail server dies, and my boss asks for me snapshots, and I brought them to him on a 128MB CF flash card. I still can't figure out why I got fired tho.
simple perl script (Score:1)
Just use Ghost (Score:2)
Dont push a round peg in a square hole..
I presume you can run the mulitcast server under wine and still use your linux server...
Re:Just use Ghost (Score:2)
dd is a much more efficient solution
-Rob