Wol wrote: > On 15/08/2022 10:45, John Covici wrote: >> zfs would solve your problem of corruption, even without versioning. >> You do a scrub at short intervals and at least you would know if the >> file is corrupted. Of course, redundancy is better, such as mirroring >> and backups take a very short time because sending from one zfs to >> another it knows exactly what bytes to send. > > I don't think he means a corrupted file, he means a corrupted video. > If the drive faithfully records the corrupted feed, the filesystem is > not going to catch it! > > Cheers, > Wol
Yep. Every once in a while, I download a video with better resolution later to find out it is bad. It gets part way through and crashes, stops dead and sits there or just plain doesn't open. Quite often, it will have the correct thumbnail so it looks good but it's bad. If I've already trashed the old one and updated my backups, I have to go find it again. Given how some sites censor stuff, it could be gone for good. Generally, I can either catch it in the trash or on the backup that hasn't been updated yet. Given time, I'll miss one one day. The issues having a lot of files causes. lol Dale :-) :-)
