From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 31 23:24:02 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E925A16A4CE for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 23:24:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from parrot.aev.net (host29-15.pool8174.interbusiness.it [81.74.15.29]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C153C43D49 for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 23:24:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Received: from soth.ventu (adsl-223-56.38-151.net24.it [151.38.56.223]) (authenticated bits=128) by parrot.aev.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j2VNiLnx080530 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2005 01:44:27 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Received: from netfence.it (xanatar.ventu [10.1.2.6]) (authenticated bits=0) by soth.ventu (8.13.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j2VNNgL4051632 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 1 Apr 2005 01:23:43 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Message-ID: <424CA2B9.1030304@netfence.it> Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 02:24:09 +0100 From: Andrea Venturoli Organization: NetFence User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (OS/2; U; Warp 4.5; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040117 X-Accept-Language: it,en,fr,de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Francisco Reyes References: <424AACD1.3060802@netfence.it> <20050330134259.GA66640@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050330141626.GB73682@xor.obsecurity.org> <424AE8FA.8080306@netfence.it> <20050331125337.M34511@zoraida.natserv.net> In-Reply-To: <20050331125337.M34511@zoraida.natserv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.45 cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mksnap_ffs woes X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 23:24:03 -0000 Francisco Reyes wrote: > In my experience databases DO NOT like file system backups unless the > database is NOT running. The more heavily you use the database the least > it will play nice with file system backups. Unfortunately we have no choice. > Is using the database backup routines an option? Nope. > Does the database has any type of replication? Nope again. >> BTW, we have almost no room for changes on the client side :( > > What is the client side? Some *old* PCs (need ISA slots) running an old DOS [wannabe] application (actually a plethora of .BAT files and some .EXEs) on Windows 95 or 98 :( Not even the firm who made that crap is willing to put their hands on it. Replacing the software would mean replacing the hardware (not only the PCs, but the attached machines too) at multiple sites, which would mean a HUGE amount of money; that's behind my power and is to be considered out of question. > Given that you said it is in Samba is seems it's some type of windowd > database. Is it a workgroup type of DB like Access or Foxpro? SQL server? It's some bunch of DBFs with associated indexes and God only knows what else. Given the clients need to be up 24/7, I though of filesystem snapshots as the only solution. I'll keep trying a bit more, since it seems doing them on a daily schedule doesn't do any harm. The problems so far have only arisen when I manually started a backup script (possibly interrupting it, cleaning up, and starting again). bye & Thanks av. P.S. The firm who sold that crap, also implemented the file server before mine; just without any RAID and/or backup facility. These data are vital to that business.