but the problem with rdiff-backup on windows is the lack of suppport for
metadata like acls, as discussed earlier in this thread.
I think, what you're trying to achive is some kind of disaster recovery and the
methods mentioned before like dd, ntfsclone and probably other image based
tools will do a better (more consistent) job on your data.
As Bart stated earlier in this thread, one could dump the acls in some kind of
controlfile, do some rdiff-backup and in case of a restore scenario, put them
back in place.
I found the tool "icacls" which should dump and later *restore* the acls.
This should bring us, together with other methods from this thread, on the way
to an incremental backup solution with rdiff and windows acl support.
I'll give it a try...
Von: Paul Piscuc [mailto:paul.piscuc@xxxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Freitag, 11. Februar 2011 00:02
An: James Harper
Cc: Bart Coninckx; Mike Sun; Guido Hecken; xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: Re: [Xen-users] Backup running Windows machines - redundancy
I'll be testing the method also, for different Windows versions, with
and without memory state backed up. One more question thought ... what
are the performance and latency aspects of doing a xm save on a Windows
machine? Does is save only the memory state, or other information
regarding the state of the machine?
And one more thing we can test. What about restoring a rdiff backup(+MBR
backup) to a fresh lvm disk ... maybe it will boot in blue screen, but
it might work.
On 02/11/2011 12:36 AM, James Harper wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>> agreed. For situations however where data files that are typically
>> opened with user applications like Word, Excel and other, I think it
>> might be safe to just snapshot the underlying LVM while the Windows DomU
>> is running and the users are not accessing the files (typically at
>> night), mount this and copy from it. I'm actually testing this now. If
>> there's interest I will post my findings.
> The Citrix Windows PV drivers include a VSS provider that (I think) allows
> you to ensure that your snapshot is consistent at both a filesystem and
> application level. I've thought about this for GPLPV but have never actually
> done anything about it.
System Administrator - Appnor MSP S.A.
US: (+1) 650 336 57 50
RO: (+4) 021 569 46 56
Xen-users mailing list