> Next, I agreeed that creating 2 GB file is not good idea, but you can't argue this
>with a customer - "why you create such big files, I can't help you. sorry"
well that is one point where i have absolutely nothing to say. as i hav
had no experience with trying to convince people about a concept. my
present attitude is: take it or go hang!
> What is IMHO ??
in my humble opinion. i thot that these few acronyms were part of every
body's vocabulary?
>
> you made good point about the issues -- why byte ?? but this is not the solution.
oh! but it wasnt meant to be. it was actually the problem.
>
> At least I don't see answer to my question yet.
well one solution is as i said... make a new fs. or...
now, the main file must be using the same old technology na? so how do
they cope with that?
aws, one solution cud be to make an extra file(on the backup server)
that only stores the changes... this file wud be small and so cud be
updated quickly... and say every 2-4 hrs, the real backup file wud be
updated from this semi-backup file. this is a pretty doable thing.
>
> I am working on to find this answer from terms like NFS, AFS, RESYNC
well... dont work too hard budd!!! but i am quite sure that u wont find
a solution in these few acronyms that u mentioned... however... good
luck! and if you do find a solution urself, please dont forget to
enlighten me!
Neil
>
------------------------------------------------
An alpha version of a web based tool to manage
your subscription with this mailing list is at
http://lists.linux-india.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr
