Konstantinos Skarlatos posted on Fri, 22 Aug 2014 09:56:55 +0300 as excerpted:
> I would stay with rsync for a while, because there is always the > possibility of a bug that corrupts both your primary filesystem and your > backup one, or send propagating corruption from one filesystem to > another (Or maybe I am too paranoid, it would be good if we could have > the opinion of a btrfs developer on this) No claim to be a dev, btrfs or otherwise, here, but I believe in this case you /are/ "being too paranoid." Both btrfs send and receive only deal with data/metadata they know how to deal with. If it's corrupt in some way or if they don't understand it, they don't send/write it, they fail. IOW, if it works without error it's as guaranteed to be golden as these things get. The problem is that it doesn't always work without error in the first place, sometimes it /does/ fail. In that instance you can always try again as the existing data/metadata shouldn't be damaged, but if it keeps failing you may have to try something else, rsync, etc. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
