chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) writes:
In article 20010318.pa13ihod001...@ginseng.pulsar-zone.net,
Matthew Mondor mm_li...@pulsar-zone.net wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:58:27 -0400
Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
Obligatory actual netbsd tech-kern content: It seems like we
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 09:54:45AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
My man page on 5.1 matches Mathew's.
But, does sync do cache flushes on all disks as well?
Does SUS require this?
I believe fsync_range with FDATASYNC is required to. Note that
since it's guaranteed to sync sufficient metadata
Thanks for the comments.
This is rdiff-backup, not rsync, and it has the notion of considering
the modified mirror dirty until it finishes, and it will roll back on
restart. I am not clear how well it does about verifying contents (or
timestamps before the last full-backup timestamp?). I am
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:58:27 -0400
Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
Obligatory actual netbsd tech-kern content: It seems like we really need
a sync_synchronous(2) system call that guarantees that all file system
operations that have completed (syscall returned) before the issuance of
the
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 12:26:03PM +, David Holland wrote:
However, a tool that really supports commit/abort semantics (unlike
rsync) shouldn't need to sync at all until it's done.
Actually, rsync could easily do it more intelligently without risk too.
Before setting the mtime to the
netbsd-5, i386, 2 x 400G SATA in rf RAID1, external USB2 WD Elements 1T
I have a UFS2+WAPBL filesystem on the above RAID1 with ~900K files in
~320GB. I'm backing it up with rdiff-backup to a USB2 external disk.
The external disk has a single large UFS2+WAPBL partition.
I found that backups
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 20:33:29 -0400
Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
So, I'm inclined to patch rdiff-backup not to fsync, since it seems
excessive, and the backup is toast if the machine crashes before it is
finished -- in that case rdiff-backup just rolls back. Opinions?
I also wonder why
Matthew Mondor wrote:
Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
So, I'm inclined to patch rdiff-backup not to fsync, since it
seems excessive, and the backup is toast if the machine crashes
before it is finished -- in that case rdiff-backup just rolls
back. Opinions?
I also wonder why fsync would
