[Rear-users] Rear development questions

Dag Wieers dag at wieers.com
Tue Aug 31 09:02:47 CEST 2010


On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Schlomo Schapiro wrote:

> design questions...
>
> IMHO (really, only my personal opinion), OBDR is always a package of ISO+backup
> on tape. I would think that if somebody would want to restore not from tape that
> then they would not really want to use a tape to just boot a small ISO image.
> Seems like a huge waste.

Both Bacula and Rear use tapes. So we'd use the same infrastructure for 
both restore options. (Not that I personally have anything to say in this, 
but at least if they have a tape-drive in every machine, we might as well 
ruse that single recovery method across the field).


> I actually would prefer if OBDR would integrate into the "rear mkbackup"
> workflow because that is what it is doing and I believe that it should be
> possible to put the OBDR stuff into ReaR in such a way that it will be enabled
> by saying
>
> OUTPUT=OBDR
> BACKUP=OBDR
>
> or something like that.
>
> Possibly one could say
>
> OUTPUT=OBDR
> BACKUP=TAPE
>
> in case it should be possible to put the backup on tape but have the boot media
> elsewhere (e.g. OUTPUT=ISO).
>
> In any case, this would really match the original ReaR design philosophy...

How about we make OBDR completely optional and only enable it if the drive 
supports it. The way I see it, having OBDR on the tape should not harm 
OBDR-less operation in any way.

The only problem would be that you cannot restore an OBDR-less tape on 
another OBDR-enabled system. Unless we _always_ use OBDR if tapes are 
used. Which would be useless for places where no HP hardware is used.

Somehow I think OBDR should not be related to BACKUP nor OUTPUT, it just 
is a seperate option that one can enable when using one of the other 
workflows. But then again people may want to enable/disable it depending 
on the case, having to go and change to config is a bad way to do this 
IMO. (It may make it very confusing for anyone using rear if the config 
may have been changed by others)


> Maybe you can tell us why you need a separate workflow for OBDR?

I think we mainly did this to not have to modify th existing workflows, 
and allow people to choose what method they want to use when they are on 
the system.

If OBDR would be enabled across the board, an mkrescue will always attempt 
to write to tape. Not exactly what you want (who knows what tape is 
inserted ?)

So a different workflow is definitely the most attractive option at this 
point.

-- 
--   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]




More information about the rear-users mailing list