The other disadvantage is that iSCSI or FC SAN is slower and costs much more $$ per GB than unmanaged SCSI storage.
-dP -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Slootman Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 2:42 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Dirvish] Hauntingly similar to Dirvish On Sat 10 Nov 2007, Petcher, Daniel wrote: > Is it just my mis-perception, or is this new Apple Time Machine > (http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/timemachine.html) backup I hear > described in their new "Leopard" OS (not to mention the > barely-developed Linux clone called Flyback - > http://code.google.com/p/flyback/) eerily familiar? > > Sure, they've got a pretty Apple-style GUI, some logic added to skip > cache files, pre-configure the expiration process. and resume after a > shut-down, but it's essentially the same idea we've been using for years. Well, NetApp Filer-style snapshots are also eerily similar to dirvish images. I'm sure NetApp did their thing before dirvish. The Netapp snapshots are cooler because (a) they're pretty much instantaneous to make, and (b) only the changed data blocks take up space, instead of only the changed files. Of course that's because it's implemented in the filesystem. Disadvantage is of course that it's not a remote backup, although it's trivial to copy out a snapshot. Paul Slootman _______________________________________________ Dirvish mailing list [email protected] http://www.dirvish.org/mailman/listinfo/dirvish _______________________________________________ Dirvish mailing list [email protected] http://www.dirvish.org/mailman/listinfo/dirvish
