On Friday, 9 February 2024 15:48:45 GMT Wols Lists wrote:
> ... And I'm not worried about a double failure - yes it could happen,
> but ...
>
> Given that my brother's ex-employer was quite happily running a raid-6
> with maybe petabytes of data, over a double disk failure (until an
> employee
On 09/02/2024 12:57, J. Roeleveld wrote:
I don't understand it exactly, but what I think happens is when I create
the snapshot it allocates, let's say, 1GB. As I write to the master
copy, it fills up that 1GB with CoW blocks, and the original blocks are
handed over to the backup snapshot. And
On Thursday, February 8, 2024 6:44:50 PM CET Wols Lists wrote:
> On 08/02/2024 06:38, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > ZFS doesn't have this "max amount of changes", but will happily fill up
> > the
> > entire pool keeping all versions available.
> > But it was easier to add zpool monitoring for this on
On Thursday, February 8, 2024 6:36:56 PM CET Wols Lists wrote:
> On 08/02/2024 06:32, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> >> After all, there's nothing stopping*you* from combining Linux and ZFS,
> >> it's just that somebody else can't do that for you, and then give you
> >> the resulting binary.
> >
> >
On 08/02/2024 06:38, J. Roeleveld wrote:
ZFS doesn't have this "max amount of changes", but will happily fill up the
entire pool keeping all versions available.
But it was easier to add zpool monitoring for this on ZFS then it was to add
snapshot monitoring to LVM.
I wonder, how do you deal
On 08/02/2024 06:32, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Personally, I'd go the MPL2 route, but that's my choice. It might not
suit you. But to achieve what you want, you need a copyleft, GPL-style
licence.
I'll have a look at that one.
Basically, each individual source file is copyleft, but not the work
On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 10:50:07 PM CET Wols Lists wrote:
> On 07/02/2024 11:07, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> >> Because snapshotting uses so much less space?
> >>
> >> So much so that, for normal usage, I probably have no need to delete any
> >> snapshots, for YEARS?
> >
> > My comment was
On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 10:59:38 PM CET Wols Lists wrote:
> On 07/02/2024 11:11, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 9:27:35 PM CET Wols Lists wrote:
> >> On 06/02/2024 13:12, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> Clearly Oracle likes this state of affairs. Either that, or they are
>
On 07/02/2024 11:11, J. Roeleveld wrote:
On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 9:27:35 PM CET Wols Lists wrote:
On 06/02/2024 13:12, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Clearly Oracle likes this state of affairs. Either that, or they are
encumbered in some way from just GPLing the ZFS code. Since they on
paper own
On 07/02/2024 11:07, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Because snapshotting uses so much less space?
So much so that, for normal usage, I probably have no need to delete any
snapshots, for YEARS?
My comment was based on using rsync to copy from the source to the backup
filesystem.
Well, that's EXACTLY
On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 6:22:34 PM CET Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2024-02-06, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 4:38:11 PM CET Grant Edwards wrote:
> >> I presume that boot/root on ext4 and home on ZFS would not require an
> >> initrd?
> >
> > Yes, that wouldn't require
On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 12:17:03 AM CET Wols Lists wrote:
> On 06/02/2024 16:19, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> >> Ah! Got it. That's one of the things I've been trying to figure out
> >> this entire thread, do I need to switch home and root to ZFS to take
> >> advantage of its snapshot support for
On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 9:27:35 PM CET Wols Lists wrote:
> On 06/02/2024 13:12, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> >> Clearly Oracle likes this state of affairs. Either that, or they are
> >> encumbered in some way from just GPLing the ZFS code. Since they on
> >> paper own the code for both projects it
On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 6:29:09 PM CET Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2024-02-06, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > If you want to use snapshots, the filesystem will need to support it.
> > (either LVM or ZFS). If you only want to create snapshots on the
> > backupserver, I actually don't see much benefit
On 06/02/2024 16:19, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Ah! Got it. That's one of the things I've been trying to figure out
this entire thread, do I need to switch home and root to ZFS to take
advantage of its snapshot support for backups? In the case you're
describing the "source" filesystem(s) can be
On 06/02/2024 15:35, Grant Edwards wrote:
If (like rsnapshot/rsync's hard-link scheme) ZFS snapshots are normal
directory trees that can be "browsed" with normal filesystem tools,
that would be ideal. [I'll do some googling...]
Bear in mind I'm talking lvm snapshots, not ZFS ...
And you can
On 06/02/2024 13:12, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Clearly Oracle likes this state of affairs. Either that, or they are
encumbered in some way from just GPLing the ZFS code. Since they on
paper own the code for both projects it seems crazy to me that this
situation persists.
GPL is not necessarily
On 2024-02-06, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> If you want to use snapshots, the filesystem will need to support it. (either
> LVM or ZFS). If you only want to create snapshots on the backupserver, I
> actually don't see much benefit over using rsync.
Upthread I've been told that ZFS snapshots
1.
On 2024-02-06, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 4:38:11 PM CET Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2024-02-05, J. Roeleveld wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, January 31, 2024 6:56:47 PM CET Rich Freeman wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:40 PM Thelma wrote:
>> >> > If zfs file system is
On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 4:35:34 PM CET Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2024-02-05, Wols Lists wrote:
> > On 04/02/2024 15:48, Grant Edwards wrote:
> >> OK I see. That's a bit different than what I'm doing. I'm backing up
> >> a specific set of directory trees from a couple different
> >>
On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 4:38:11 PM CET Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2024-02-05, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 31, 2024 6:56:47 PM CET Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:40 PM Thelma wrote:
> >> > If zfs file system is superior to ext4 and it seems to it is.
>
On 2024-02-05, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 31, 2024 6:56:47 PM CET Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:40 PM Thelma wrote:
>> > If zfs file system is superior to ext4 and it seems to it is.
>> > Why hasn't it been adopted more widely in Linux?
>>
>> The main
On 2024-02-05, Wols Lists wrote:
> On 04/02/2024 15:48, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> OK I see. That's a bit different than what I'm doing. I'm backing up
>> a specific set of directory trees from a couple different
>> filesystems. There are large portions of the "source" filesystems that
>> I have no
On Monday, February 5, 2024 2:35:12 PM CET Rich Freeman wrote:
> First, thanks for the Ars link in the other email. I'll give that a read.
You're welcome. I found that when I was looking for the latest state of btrfs.
I was actually hoping that the biggest issues had been resolved by now.
> On
First, thanks for the Ars link in the other email. I'll give that a read.
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 7:55 AM J. Roeleveld wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, January 31, 2024 6:56:47 PM CET Rich Freeman wrote:
> > The main barrier is that its license isn't GPL-compatible. It is
> > FOSS, but the license was
On Wednesday, January 31, 2024 6:56:47 PM CET Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:40 PM Thelma wrote:
> > If zfs file system is superior to ext4 and it seems to it is.
> > Why hasn't it been adopted more widely in Linux?
>
> The main barrier is that its license isn't GPL-compatible.
On Wednesday, January 31, 2024 2:01:32 PM CET Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 6:45 AM John Covici wrote:
> > I know you said you wanted to stay with ext4, but going to zfs reduced
> > my backup time on my entire system from several hours to just a few
> > minutes because taking a
On 04/02/2024 15:48, Grant Edwards wrote:
OK I see. That's a bit different than what I'm doing. I'm backing up
a specific set of directory trees from a couple different
filesystems. There are large portions of the "source" filesystems that
I have no need to back up. And within those directory
On 2024-02-04, Wols Lists wrote:
> On 04/02/2024 06:24, Grant Edwards wrote:
>
>> I don't understand, are you saying that somehow your backup doesn't
>> contain a copy of every file?
>>
> YES! Let's make it clear though, we're talking about EVERY VERSION of
> every backed up file.
> And you
On 04/02/2024 06:24, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2024-02-03, Wol wrote:
On 03/02/2024 16:02, Grant Edwards wrote:
rsnapshot is an application that uses rsync to do
hourly/daily/weekly/monthly (user-configurable) backups of selected
directory trees. It's done using rsync to create snapshots. They
On 2024-02-03, Wol wrote:
> On 03/02/2024 16:02, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> rsnapshot is an application that uses rsync to do
>> hourly/daily/weekly/monthly (user-configurable) backups of selected
>> directory trees. It's done using rsync to create snapshots. They are
>> in-effect "incremental"
On Saturday, 3 February 2024 17:32:17 GMT Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 6:39 PM Grant Edwards
wrote:
> > On 2024-01-31, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > In any case, these COW filesystems, much like git, store data in a
> > > way that makes it very efficient to diff two snapshots and
On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 6:39 PM Grant Edwards wrote:
>
> On 2024-01-31, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> > In any case, these COW filesystems, much like git, store data in a
> > way that makes it very efficient to diff two snapshots and back up
> > only the data that has changed. [...]
>
> In order to
On 03/02/2024 16:02, Grant Edwards wrote:
rsnapshot is an application that uses rsync to do
hourly/daily/weekly/monthly (user-configurable) backups of selected
directory trees. It's done using rsync to create snapshots. They are
in-effect "incremental" backups, because the snapshots themselves
On 2024-02-03, Michael wrote:
>> If you'll forgive the analogy, we'll say the the functionality of
>> rsync (as used by rsnapshot) is built-in to ZFS.
>
> Broadly and rather loosely yes, by virtue of the COW and snapshot fs
> architecture and the btrfs/zfs send-receive commands.
>
>> Is there
On 2024-02-02, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 4:39 PM Grant Edwards
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I googled for ZFS backup applications, but didn't find anything that
>> seemed to be widespread and "supported" the way that rsnapshot is.
>
> I'm not exactly sure I'm following your thoughts above
On Friday, 2 February 2024 23:39:18 GMT Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2024-01-31, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > Honestly, at this point I would not run any storage I cared about on
> > anything but zfs. There are just so many benefits.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > In any case, these COW filesystems, much like
On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 4:39 PM Grant Edwards
wrote:
>
> I googled for ZFS backup applications, but didn't find anything that
> seemed to be widespread and "supported" the way that rsnapshot is.
I'm not exactly sure I'm following your thoughts above but
have you investigated True-NAS? It is Open
On 2024-01-31, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Honestly, at this point I would not run any storage I cared about on
> anything but zfs. There are just so many benefits.
>
> [...]
>
> In any case, these COW filesystems, much like git, store data in a
> way that makes it very efficient to diff two
On Wednesday, 31 January 2024 21:30:56 GMT Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 1:42 PM Wols Lists wrote:
> > On 31/01/2024 17:56, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > I don't think there are
> > > any RAID implementations that do full write journaling to protect
> > > against the write hole
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 1:42 PM Wols Lists wrote:
>
> On 31/01/2024 17:56, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > I don't think there are
> > any RAID implementations that do full write journaling to protect
> > against the write hole problem, but those would obviously underperform
> > zfs as well.
>
> This
On 31/01/2024 17:56, Rich Freeman wrote:
I don't think there are
any RAID implementations that do full write journaling to protect
against the write hole problem, but those would obviously underperform
zfs as well.
This feature has been added to mdraid, iirc.
Cheers,
Wol
On 2024-01-31, Thelma wrote:
> On 1/31/24 08:50, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2024-01-31, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>>> Honestly, at this point I would not run any storage I cared about on
>>> anything but zfs. There are just so many benefits.
>>
>> I'll definitely put zfs on my list of things to
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:40 PM Thelma wrote:
>
> If zfs file system is superior to ext4 and it seems to it is.
> Why hasn't it been adopted more widely in Linux?
>
The main barrier is that its license isn't GPL-compatible. It is
FOSS, but the license was basically designed to keep it from
On 1/31/24 08:50, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2024-01-31, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 6:45 AM John Covici wrote:
I know you said you wanted to stay with ext4, but going to zfs reduced
my backup time on my entire system from several hours to just a few
minutes because taking a
On 2024-01-31, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 6:45 AM John Covici wrote:
>>
>> I know you said you wanted to stay with ext4, but going to zfs reduced
>> my backup time on my entire system from several hours to just a few
>> minutes because taking a snapshot is so quick and copying
On 2024-01-31, gentoo-u...@krasauskas.dev wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-01-30 at 20:38 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>
>> It took me an embarassing number of tries to get the intervals and
>> crontab entries to mesh so it worked the way I wanted. It's not
>> really
>> that difficult (and it's pretty well
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 6:45 AM John Covici wrote:
>
> I know you said you wanted to stay with ext4, but going to zfs reduced
> my backup time on my entire system from several hours to just a few
> minutes because taking a snapshot is so quick and copying to another
> pool is also very quick.
>
On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 03:14:19 -0500,
gentoo-u...@krasauskas.dev wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2024-01-30 at 20:38 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
> >
> > It took me an embarassing number of tries to get the intervals and
> > crontab entries to mesh so it worked the way I wanted. It's not
> > really
> > that
On Tue, 2024-01-30 at 20:38 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
>
> It took me an embarassing number of tries to get the intervals and
> crontab entries to mesh so it worked the way I wanted. It's not
> really
> that difficult (and it's pretty well documented), but I managed to
> combine a misreading of
On 2024-01-30, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 3:08 PM Wol wrote:
>>
>> On 30/01/2024 19:19, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> > I'd echo the other advice. It really depends on your goals.
>>
>> If you just want a simple backup, I'd use something like rsync onto lvm
>> or btrfs or something.
On 2024-01-30, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:15 PM Grant Edwards
> wrote:
>>
>> Are there other backup solutions that people would like to suggest I
>> look at to replace rsnapshot? I was happy enough with rsnapshot (when
>> it was running), but perhaps there's something else
On 2024-01-30, Michael wrote:
> On Tuesday, 30 January 2024 18:15:09 GMT Grant Edwards wrote:
>> I need to set up some sort of automated backup on a couple Gentoo
>> machines (typical desktop software development and home use). One of
>> them used rsnapshot in the past but the crontab entries
On 2024-01-30, Thelma wrote:
> I backup, periodically:
> - corontab (user, root)
> - etc
> - hylafax
>
> daily:
> - data
>
> It all depend what you want you backup, how large is your data.
> For backup standard "rsync" over the network does the job OK
rsnapshot is a perl app that
54 matches
Mail list logo
