scottba Posted May 30, 2002 Report Share Posted May 30, 2002 Going in at a bit of a high level here, but Retro could do with the following, notably for those of us doing network backups (it's getting difficult supporting big networks!) * 'delta' file backup - i.e only backup the changes inside files : if a user changes a big Outlook PST file or a Virtual PC container, the whole thing goes out to backup again. Real bad. Capacity vanishes in an instant. This I'm thinking has got to the point it's pretty essential to have this. This one is my big request. * Client restore - the ability for users to see (their own) backup files and recover them themselves (no admin intervention). Obviously this is a bit tricky for tape backups (as the tape needs to be in the drive), but might be appropriate in library or disk (e.g. NAS/SAN) backup scenarios (or staged scenarios - recent files go to disk, really old files go to tape). Recovering files for users who've 'lost' them is a pain in the rear... * Linux (and maybe Solaris?) client (heck, server??) support. The linux space is a bit short of quality established backup software, and those of us with mixed networks can't (easily) backup our Linux boxes using Retro. * A wish: server-to-server comms for client handling. I.E. a user goes to work at a satellite office a few days. The Retro server there detects their laptop, confirms with the main central server the backup requirements, and backs up the client as needed. * A specific one: if you're in 'backup server' mode, the ability to stuff in a new tape and tell retro which backup set to put it (and start using that set). Regards, SB [Retrospect user since... 19... eighty something?... heck, it's been a long time...] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lv2ski Posted May 30, 2002 Report Share Posted May 30, 2002 1. Delta File - Good suggestion. 2. Client Restore. We hope to implement this into a future release. 3. Linux/Solaris clients will be available soon in Retrospect. 4. * A wish: server-to-server comms for client handling. I.E. a user goes to work at a satellite office a few days. The Retro server there detects their laptop, confirms with the main central server the backup requirements, and backs up the client as needed. Retrospect does this. Its called Backup Server Script found under Automate/Scripts. It goes out and polls for a client. The client would need a static IP address in this case above though....I'd assume. 5. Specific tape....good suggestion! Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottba Posted May 30, 2002 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2002 Melissa wrote: > 1. Delta File - Good suggestion. Yep! ;-) >2. Client Restore. We hope to implement this into a future release. Cool... >3. Linux/Solaris clients will be available soon in Retrospect. Better... >4. * A wish: server-to-server comms for client handling. I.E. a user goes to work at a >satellite office a few days. The Retro server there detects their laptop, confirms with the >main central server the backup requirements, and backs up the client as needed. >Retrospect does this. Its called Backup Server Script found under Automate/Scripts. It >goes out and polls for a client. You mean it'd find a client it previously knew nothing about and just back it up? I didn't think retro would do that... cool if it does though... >The client would need a static IP address in this case above >though....I'd assume. This might be an issue... DHCP is a more likely scenario. Would this work if the clients have password on their clients though? Also, if it only worked with static'd IP's (not DHCP leases) it might be a tad limiting.... hmmm... might have to have a play here though, see what comes up... 5. Specific tape....good suggestion! Yep... drives us batty when backup server runs out of tape space... we're never quite sure what'll happen when we stick in a new tape... ;-) Regards, SB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottba Posted May 30, 2002 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2002 I forgot one thing on my first post: * Parallel/streaming backups : the ability to backup multiple clients simultaneously (in appropriate scenarios/configurations, naturally). For example, if you have a big fast server and a very big fast tape drive (or disk array etc) yet a (relatively) slow network (or slow clients), it would be good if retro could commune with multiple clients to make best use of the speed/bandwidth between the server and the backup device. Of course, talking to multiple clients over the *same* relatively slow network might not help much, but a server with multiple LAN interface cards and a switched network would possibly alleviate this. Just another thing to help cut down "backup window" time... PS: on the bit about multiple retrospect servers talking to each other: I think my real idea was for server A to tell server B *which* files to backup (or which had already been backed up - i.e. to send over a copy of the snapshot )- so that server Bdoesn't waste time backing up stuff which is already backed up elsewhere. Although, obviously, if part of your backup is hundreds of miles away it doesn't help much in the event of a failure... ;-) Hmmm... now the mind is ticking... maybe then after backup Server B could send Server A the updated files to add to Server A's original backup of the client (assuming a fast LAN/WAN link)... now that would be cool... getting to be a lot of work for a specific use though... SB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lv2ski Posted May 30, 2002 Report Share Posted May 30, 2002 >4. You mean it'd find a client it previously knew nothing about and just back it up? I didn't think retro would do that... cool if it does though... No. It would have to know about it at least...it couldn't randomly find Retrospect clients as then one server would be backing up all Retrospect customers with clients.... You would have to log in the client via password. Then where ever it was (another state, country, etc) it could find it via IP address and back it up. I say IP address as if you were broadcasting all IPs to find this DHCP client then it might take for ever to find this one client while hitting all these other IP address first. just an idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.