What is everyone using for storage. I am currently trying to decide between using NFS (to a ZFSonLinux machine) or iSCSI (we have a san for replication that also has some room for backups)
Is there any advantage to using a block level device?
David
Same question here. We set up a test UrB server that currently saves data to an SMB share from a MacOSX server that has a direct-attached SAS raid. This is NOT working well and I need to find a suitable replacement.
Are you using smbfs to mount that server. We are testing with an openfiler box but I have never had great performance with openfiler and nfs hence to move to zfsonlinux and debian. I think I am going to try it today to see how it performs.
No, actually my first attempt to build a linux UrServer based on Ubuntu 11.04 was a failure, so I wiped it and rolled it out using Windows Server 2008 R2 instead. The share is mounted via native SMB protocol, but it’s not working right at all. The file backup is failing disastrously when it attempts to create the hardlinks. I don’t think you can create hardlinks to a mounted SMB volume, much less one hosted on a MacOS X server.
So I am now looking at wiping again and doing things “the right way” which at this point seems to be one of:
- a Windows server connected via iSCSI to a block-storage array device and formatted using NTFS
- a linux server connected to a btrfs or ZFS storage pool
I am still gathering info on this – if anyone has pointers for us “beginners” any advice on setting up storage would be appreciated. How are the rest of you doing it? I’ve got about 10 clients to back up, want to keep image as well as file-based backups and total data size (before de-duplication) is about 4TB.
I have had good luck so far with Ubuntu 12.10 using the PPA as well as Debian wheezy using just the dpkg. I can look back through my notes if you would like any help.