kanderson wrote:OR...
just do 1 rsync, but zip it up on the backup server rather than the Scalix server. Save it out from there.
Just a clarification here...
What's the difference between this, and what I just said? The scalix services are up just as fast, since both use rsync to a local dir. The only difference is that mine uses tar on the local system, preserving file permissions, symlinks, etc and keeping it as a fully restorable filesystem. Using the backup server to do the zip isn't possible if the backup is nothing more than a NAS, but even if it's a windows system, you loose the fully restorable system portion.
If the worry here is that using the scalix server to perform the tar will cause too great of a load on the system, then one can get fancy and make use of different throttling methods, but in my experience the load isn't high enough to make the system non-usable. (Then again, I will admit that my system is only between 75-100 users big).
Again, not saying Kev is wrong, just providing an alternative solution, that still provides full restore capability (where using zip from a windows-based backup server would not allow such a restore). Using a remote tar from a *nix based remote backup server, using NFS instead of SMB for the network sharing would still be able to provide a fully-restorable solution, and limit the amount of time used overall, and cpu-wise.
Mito