[missing attribution restored] Matthew Dillon <dil...@apollo.backplane.com> wrote: > per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > :cronfy <cro...@gmail.com> wrote: > : > :> And also, maybe there are other ways to create incremental backups > :> instead of using rsync/hardlinks? > : > :Yes. Use dump(8) -- that's what it's for. It reads the inodes, > :directories, and files directly from the disk device, thereby > :eliminating stat() overhead entirely. > : > :Any replication mechanism -- rsync, tar, even dd -- can be used > :as a backup mechanism, but dump was specifically designed for the > :purpose.
> Well, dump is 25+ years old ... Why are you running BSD if you prefer newer (=> less mature) stuff? Switch to Linux! > ... On a modern (large) filesystem you are virtually guaranteed > to get corruption due to the asynchronous nature of the dump. > > This can be partially mitigated by using a block level snapshot on > the UFS source filesystem and then dumping the snapshot instead of > the live filesystem ... IOW by using "dump -L" > Plus dump uses mtime to detect changes, which is unreliable, ... Are you sure about that? Last I knew it used ctime. > and the output produced by dump is not live-accessible whereas a > snapshot / live filesystem copy is. That makes the dump fairly > worthless for anything other than catastrophic recovery. Ever heard of "restore -i"? _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"