Re: [PLUG] epiphany or stupidity?

This plus...

In a VM context you have a similar thing. I can technically spin up and unlimited number of clones against a single backing file. If the personalities changes / differences are well kept (i.e. host information... name, IP, specific services that are running, etc.) then I only need to protect the backing file and clone's data and system personality.

There are even some rebasing options now but I haven't played around this those (and its outside the scope of the post).

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Keith C. Perry, MS E.E.

Owner, DAO Technologies LLC

(O) +1.215.525.4165 x2033

(M) +1.215.432.5167

www.daotechnologies.com

From: "Jason Plum" <jplum@archlinuxarm.org>
To: "Philadelphia Linux User's Group Discussion List" <plug@lists.phillylinux.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 11:58:44 AM
Subject: Re: [PLUG] epiphany or stupidity?

Not the most useful, but going to just flop this out there:

De-dupe, netboot, etc. It all comes down to how you're doing the backups, what they are/aren't encrypted or compressed, if dedupe could be done at the storage or disk level, etc.

If you're nfs-booting, and the root are essentially the same, you get that benefit easily thanks to the SAN, but... in circles of implementation questions we will go.

Jason Plum

WarheadsSE

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Tone Montone <tonemontone@gmail.com> wrote:

I was running last night, and for some reason, I had an idea about backups. It occurred to me that if I had 100 Red Hat systems, all running the same OS and Patch level, would I need full backups on all the systems. Wouldn't there be static information like executables that would be the same across all systems? So instead of doing fulls x 100, I could do a full x 1, then just differentials or incrementals on the others, thereby reducing total storage required on tapes.
Then I thought if I took the same idea and applied it to the SAN storage, could I have fixed images that the systems run on, and only require 1 instance of it, thereby reducing total storage space requirements.

Then I thought, either this is a really stupid idea, or it's brilliant and most likely already done.

Comments?

Thanks,

Mike

___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug

___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug