* Charles Swiger [2005-08-30 10:49 -0400]
On Aug 30, 2005, at 3:32 AM, Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
Yes, that's correct! But let's say I keep more than one snapshot around. I
maybe didn't mention this, but this the sole purpose of using snapshots;
for me to have more full backups
* Garance A Drosihn [2005-08-30 12:50 -0400]
Fwiw, I understand the problem you're trying to describe. And the
basic issue is that rsync keeps no information between separate
runs of it. It has no way of knowing that a given file on the
source volume used to be at a different location.
* Greg Barniskis [2005-08-29 11:45 -0500]
Eh? Bad assumptions about snapshots, I think. If a snapshot occupied even a
tenth of the space of the data that it represented, we would quickly fill all
our disks and the snapshot technology would be almost as painful as useful.
A snapshot is
* Norberto Meijome [2005-08-30 02:14 +1000]
I take your word wrt to how it works. Assuming of course that you move
within the same filesystem.
Yes, I'm talking about the same filsystem.
(touche). yup, that's what would happenbut tha's the nature of the beast
:) don't keep too many
* Bob Johnson [2005-08-29 12:44 -0400]
Use a ggated(8) + ggatec(8) pair to establish a remote volume that
looks local, then use gmirror to make it a mirror of the local drive.
The big gotcha is that ggated/c only moves i/o requests and data via
the net, it doesn't move ioctls, so some
Svein Halvor Halvorsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Only I thought I'd keep a list of
filename/inode pairs from each sync, so before I do a sync I could compare
the lists to find out which files appears to be the same, only with a new
name.
Doesn't
Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
* Greg Barniskis [2005-08-29 11:45 -0500]
Eh? Bad assumptions about snapshots, I think. If a snapshot occupied even a
tenth of the space of the data that it represented, we would quickly fill all
our disks and the snapshot technology would be almost as painful as
On Aug 30, 2005, at 3:32 AM, Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
Yes, that's correct! But let's say I keep more than one snapshot
around. I
maybe didn't mention this, but this the sole purpose of using
snapshots;
for me to have more full backups laying around.
A snapshot on the same disk does
At 9:32 AM +0200 8/30/05, Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
The solution: Somehow, I need to mirror all the move ops on the
remote system before doing the rsync. This could probably be done
by making a hash table of inodes/filenames pairs (or triplets, etc)
each time i sync. Then the next time, I
Charles Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Aug 30, 2005, at 3:32 AM, Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
Yes, that's correct! But let's say I keep more than one snapshot
around. I
maybe didn't mention this, but this the sole purpose of using
snapshots;
for me to have more full backups
Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
* Svein Halvor Halvorsen [2005-08-28 23:53 +0200]
Does this sound reasonable? Is there any precautions I should take? Are
there any other tools better suited for the task at hand?
I'm responding to my own message.
Let's say I happen to move all music from
On 8/29/05, Norberto Meijome [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
* Svein Halvor Halvorsen [2005-08-28 23:53 +0200]
Does this sound reasonable? Is there any precautions I should take? Are
there any other tools better suited for the task at hand?
I'm responding to
* Norberto Meijome [2005-08-30 00:32 +1000]
isn't that the whole point of having a backup? to have *another* copy of your
files?
Well, yes and no.
The idea is that I have a main computer that I want to backup. I want the
backup to be (a) remote, (b) incremental and (c) random-accessible.
* Hornet [2005-08-29 11:11 -0400]
cat /usr/ports/sysutils/rsnapshot/pkg-descr
It seems this is just a wrapper around the tools I was already planning on
using. In this regard, it's a nice port. But won't this perl-script suffer
for tha same shortcommings that rsync will? Or does it use
Svein Halvor Halvorsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Svein Halvor Halvorsen [2005-08-28 23:53 +0200]
Does this sound reasonable? Is there any precautions I should take? Are
there any other tools better suited for the task at hand?
I'm responding to my own message.
Let's say I happen
Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
* Norberto Meijome [2005-08-30 00:32 +1000]
isn't that the whole point of having a backup? to have *another* copy of your
files?
Well, yes and no.
The idea is that I have a main computer that I want to backup. I want the
backup to be (a) remote, (b)
On 8/29/05, Norberto Meijome [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
* Norberto Meijome [2005-08-30 00:32 +1000]
I guess the proper way to do this (if you are REALLY REALLY worried
about that extra spaced used for snapshots in the remote site) would be
to implement a GEOM
Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
But: If I move the file from /foo/test to /bar/test on my main computer,
rsync will create a BRAND NEW FILE in /bar (and delete the file in /foo,
since I used the --delete option). Now this NEW file will have a new
inode, and cover new sectors on disk. The
18 matches
Mail list logo
