Please not again this discussion...
it has been discussed in depth (if i remember right) last fall,
so please have a lock at the archives of that time.
Christoph
Uncle George wrote:
Ya, but didnt someone post that DUMP on linux can fail - if the
conditions are right? I think is was
does this mean that there was a definitive conclusion?
Christoph Scheeder wrote:
Please not again this discussion...
On Tue, 28 May 2002 at 6:34am, Uncle George wrote
does this mean that there was a definitive conclusion?
Yup -- use what you are comfortable with and what your testing proves
works.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
Sorry, thats a general conclusion to most things in life.
Is there a situation(s) where DUMP can fail. If yes, why are there no
warning labels ( ie the probability of failure is 1 in 1billion ). If
NO, than can I see the proof that absolutely refutes Mr. Torvolds
statement.
/gat
Its
no conlusion all people on this list agree to.
you can melt down the discusssion to the following:
1.)linux-ext2-dump is guaranteed to work correct if you have an
completely inactive and sync'ed filesystem. in other words:
if your fs is not mount at all or at least mounted read-only.
in all other
: Uncle George [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 5:51 AM
Cc: Amanda mailinglist
Subject: Re: Linux DUMP
Sorry, thats a general conclusion to most things in life.
Is there a situation(s) where DUMP can fail. If yes, why are there no
warning labels ( ie the probability of failure
This linux-kernel mailing list posting has a short summary and
interesting update on the issue (that I had not seen before, anyway).
http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/linux/linux-kernel/2001-40/1002.htmlhttp://www.cs.helsinki.fi/linux/linux-kernel/2001-40/1002.html
Summary: kernels later than 2.4.11
Also Sprach Anthony A. D. Talltree:
Its interesting that I was unaware of this dilema ( the possible failure
of DUMP ) until it was posted on this list
It's mentioned in the second paragraph of Sun's ufsdump man page.
Despite all the FUD that's been parroted about dump over the years, by
Which backup program is best? dump, says some people. Elizabeth D. Zwicky
torture tested lots of backup programs. The clear choice for preserving
all your data and all the peculiarities of Unix filesystems is dump, she
stated. Elizabeth created filesystems containing a large variety of
Ya, but didnt someone post that DUMP on linux can fail - if the
conditions are right? I think is was suggested that SMP systems can
demonstrate the failure sooner.
I think that Mr. Torvolds ( sorry is i mis-spelled) made that comment or
conclusion.
Are there some caveats that need to be added
dump reads on a lower level than tar, and is more sensitive when dumping
an active file system. Dumps may be rendered useless due to a file
changing underneath dump. If the system is placed in single user mode
there should be no problem. If the file system is quiet, there should be
close to
On Mon, 20 May 2002, Brian Jonnes wrote:
dump reads on a lower level than tar, and is more sensitive when dumping
an active file system. Dumps may be rendered useless due to a file
changing underneath dump. If the system is placed in single user mode
there should be no problem. If the
: Amanda mailinglist
Subject: Re: Linux DUMP
dump reads on a lower level than tar, and is more sensitive when dumping
an active file system. Dumps may be rendered useless due to a file
changing underneath dump. If the system is placed in single user mode
there should be no problem. If the file
On Mon, 20 May 2002 at 9:26am, Brian Jonnes wrote
What are the current feelings of the group re the following? Should I switch
to TAR?
*Careful* -- this one can erupt quickly! The canonical answer is use what
works in your testing and what makes you comfortable. Some people have
noticed
--
On Mon, 20 May 2002, Brian Jonnes wrote:
What are the current feelings of the group re the following? Should I switch
to TAR?
dump reads on a lower level than tar, and is more sensitive when dumping
an active file system. Dumps may be rendered useless due to a file
changing underneath
problems was using Linux dump.
Is
simply useless with amanda, stick with tar (not
very
usefull if you have to backup time sensitive files
as
Rational Clearcase VOB's).
I'm doing my backups with Linux dump, Solaris
ufsdump, HP-UX dump
and IRIX xfsdump. No problems. I did update
=?iso-8859-1?q?Jos=E9=20Vicente=20N=FA=F1ez=20Zuleta?= wrote:
Also another of my problems was using Linux dump. Is
simply useless with amanda, stick with tar (not very
usefull if you have to backup time sensitive files as
Rational Clearcase VOB's).
I'm doing my backups with Linux dump
17 matches
Mail list logo
