Simpler Navigation for Servers and Operating Systems
Completed: a much simpler Servers and Operating Systems section of the Community. We combined many of the older boards, so you won't have to click through so many levels to get at the information you need. Check the consolidated boards here as many sub-forums are now single boards.
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

fbackup OR tar

SOLVED
Go to solution
Shahbaz_1
Regular Advisor

fbackup OR tar

Hi,
I am looking at backup tool options on HP Unix 11.0. Whether to use fbackup/frecover or tar. Which one is more effecient (time saving),reliable and easy to use. Is frecover is as easy as tar xvf ---.
Thanks & Regards
Syed
Let's share the great thing "THE KNOWLEDGE"
6 REPLIES
Hartmut Lang
Trusted Contributor

Re: fbackup OR tar

fbackup is fast and flexible. It needs some time to read the manual pages, but i think it is worth to understand its options.
If you need something protable for different platforms, stick to tar. fbackup is HPUX-only!

Hardy
Steven Sim Kok Leong
Honored Contributor

Re: fbackup OR tar

Hi,

fbackup supports backing up large files that are greater 2 GB while the tar binary (not the GNU tar) that comes with HP-UX supports file sizes only up to 2 GB.

Hope this helps. Regards.

Steven Sim Kok Leong
Email: steven@beepz.com. Homepage: https://www.beepz.com
Peter Kloetgen
Esteemed Contributor
Solution

Re: fbackup OR tar

Hi,

you should allways take the fbackup- command instead of tar for several reasons:
- tar is very slow when doing a backup
- tar is not able to backup large files (bigger than 2GB)
- tar can't handle UIDs bigger than 65536

fbackup doesn't have these problems, it is much faster than tar and can handle large files and UIDs bigger than 65536.

there is an alternative for these two commands:

pax- command, which will be the industrial standard- command on all UNIXes in the future.

pax can read all tar- and cpio- formats and is available on all UNIXes and is planned for Linux at the moment. If you run fbackup- commands pax is doing the job.

So: your choice should be fbackup or pax!
these commands are as simple as tar... see:
man pax/fbackup


Allways stay on the bright side of life!


Peter
I'm learning here as well as helping
Ravi_8
Honored Contributor

Re: fbackup OR tar

Hi,

tar is slow compared to fbackup/frecover.
however fbackup/frecover works only on HP-UX.
if you wanted backed file to be portable to other OS then i suggest to go for tar.
never give up
Steven Sim Kok Leong
Honored Contributor

Re: fbackup OR tar

Hi,

Some caveats to note about fbackup:

1) fbackup cannot be used with non-rewinding devices such as /dev/rmt/0mn but tar can be used with non-rewinding devices.

2) [extract from man page] fbackup does not back up network special files because RFA networking is obsolete. A warning message is issued if a network special file is encountered in the backup graph and the file is skipped.

3) [extract from man page] The use of fbackup for backing up NFS mounted file systems is not guaranteed to work as expected if the backup is done as a privileged user. This is due to the manner in which NFS handles privileged-user access by mapping user root and uid 0 to user nobody, usually uid -2, thus disallowing root privileges on the remote system to a root user on the local system.

Hope this helps. Regards.

Steven Sim Kok Leong
Email: steven@beepz.com. Homepage: https://www.beepz.com
Shahbaz_1
Regular Advisor

Re: fbackup OR tar

Thanks everybody,
I got my answer. So I should explore more on fbackup/frecover.
Regards
Syed
Let's share the great thing "THE KNOWLEDGE"