From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <lists@merit.unu.edu> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54B53621B1 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 15:35:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D987DB869 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 15:34:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.merit.unu.edu (postoffice.merit.unu.edu [192.87.143.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5A913B85C for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 15:34:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.242.6.2] (unknown [10.242.6.2]) by mail.merit.unu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 719FC812FE103; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 15:34:47 +0200 (CEST) To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>, Proxmox VE user list <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> References: <c84ac772-d577-27fd-710c-293d8a4baffe@proxmox.com> <7d1bd7a4-f47b-4a1a-9278-ff1889508c33@gmail.com> <1768587204.461.1594383204281@webmail.proxmox.com> <450971473.487.1594395714078@webmail.proxmox.com> <aa8534d4-174b-5069-e27b-160b8fb92d72@merit.unu.edu> <c51e8cf4-1c6d-051b-f91d-5d600a566c5a@proxmox.com> From: mj <lists@merit.unu.edu> Message-ID: <c522fc9b-6b3f-7770-d32a-c1bb47961884@merit.unu.edu> Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 15:34:46 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <c51e8cf4-1c6d-051b-f91d-5d600a566c5a@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW -0.7 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, low trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [PVE-User] Proxmox Backup Server (beta) X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-user>, <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-user/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user>, <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 13:35:22 -0000 Hi Thomas, On 7/11/20 1:38 PM, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Nope, can do everything[0][1][2]! You can do file-based backups also. The client > is a statically linked binary and runs on every relatively current Linux with > an amd64 based CPU, so it doesn't even has to be a Debian server. That is great. And then some follow=up questions if I may...: - I don't see any 'DR' options, right? As in: bare metal disaster recovery restores, using a recovery boot iso, and restore a system from scratch to bootable state. It's not a tool for that, right? - I guess with VMs etc, the backup will use the available VM options (ceph, zfs, lvm) to snapshot a VM, in order to get consistent backups, like the current pve backup does. But how does that work with non-VM client? (some non-VM client systems run LVM, so lvm could be used to create a snapshot and backup that, for example. Does it do that? Will my non-VM mysql backups be consistent?) - Any timeframe for adding LTO tape support..? We're really excited, and time-permitted I will try to play around with this monday/tuesday. :-) MJ