[Dirvish] More than on tree per backup?

[Kelsey Cummings]

On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 10:11:22AM -0600, Richard Geoffrion wrote:
> But then...maybe I'm totally lost...which I think I am.  Good luck though.

Who knows?  Perhaps I'm lost.

The reason that I want to do it that way (or by exludes if it's the only
way) is that I'm talking about scaling dirvish to backup about 150 servers
each with at least two local filesystems and some with quite a bit more a
good number of which have as many as 48 or more NFS mounts (making managing
the exludes painful, and what happens when a new NFS mount show up and
someone forgets to update the excludes and dirvish decides to walk down
into my netapps and get lost?)

There are other advantages to having the entire system backed up into a
single tree on the server - I can get a complete image of the entire server
regardless of what it's local file system config is which simplifies
restoration, finding files and lets me do things like chroot into the server
as it was at some time in the path which is particularly useful to us.  The
thought of having N number of valuts defined for every server just makes me
shudder.

I'll keep on mucking around.

-- 
Kelsey Cummings - kgc at corp.sonic.net      sonic.net, inc.
System Architect                          2260 Apollo Way
707.522.1000                              Santa Rosa, CA 95407