On a relevant note. I was always told that: The best way to get an accurate backup on U2 is to:
-Pause the writes -Do a logical volume snapshot (*nix only) -Resume the writes -Let the logical volume snapshot finish copying off to your backup space to disk. -On top of that you should still do a regular normal backup (like uvbackup, or tar, dd, or whatever) overnight, as snapshots were never intended to be a "Full Backup" solution. As far as windows is concerned I can't really say, other than, my experience with Symantec (Vertias) Backup Exec was always a horrible experience. So use something else. StorageCraft, or ComVault, I've heard good things about. StorageCraft being the way cheaper option. On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 1:16 PM, John Thompson <jthompson...@gmail.com>wrote: > Here is some Pie in the Sky info for ya... > > "btrfs" or "Butter FS" is being developed by Oracle for Linux. > > Its one of the reasons Oracle shutdown the development of ZFS when they > bought Sun. > (ZFS has many of those snapshotting features you are talking about). > > So now you have all of these spinoffs for ZFS with companies like: > http://nexenta.com/corp/ > http://www.ixsystems.com/ix/storage/titan-truenas-pro > > Nexenta is based on a Solaris kernel (with Debian's package management) > TrueNAS is based on a BSD kernel with ZFS implemented there. > > ZFS never made it into the Linux kernel because of licensing issues... > although there is still some attempt to do it. Apple at one point was > talking about it, but, they shut the project down. > > So, btrfs, is the attempt to get those features you guys are talking about > into the Linux kernel, and because its oracle, they will eventually do it, > I'm sure (there is enough money behind it) > > However, as all filesystem development goes, they have been working on > btrfs for some years now... and at present, it does not have a filesystem > checker (fsck) that can fix errors. So its not recommend for production > use. Unless of course they have just released it. > > I played with btrfs in its infancy a couple of years ago... at a time when > you could not even boot from it. It was very finnicky, as anything new is > sometimes. > > I use Nexenta free version for a couple of video cameras I got saddled into > providing storage for. It was cheap enough to setup a spare machine I had > with it. > > As far as using either for U2, "Much testing and documenting would be > required me thinks" > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Robert Porter <ropor...@ochsner.org>wrote: > >> >> Snapshotting doesn't get rid of mirroring just the need to break/merge >> them. I'd still suggest using mirrors. The risk of disk failure is too >> great. Guess you could use some other level of RAID to get there but it's >> hard to beat spindles plus mirrors (0+1) for databases. In fact our >> snapshot logical volumes are striped and mirrored as well. The snapshot >> volume is holding the writes, you have the same risk of a disk failure >> there. >> >> On the Linux front, are you talking about Btrfs (aka "Better FS")? I've >> read some good things, but haven't gotten the nerve to play with it yet. >> >> >> >>> Wols Lists <antli...@youngman.org.uk> 8/23/2011 6:28 AM >>> >> On 22/08/11 14:56, Robert Porter wrote: >> ... >> >> Interesting. The reason I suggested breaking the mirror was that >> mirroring is a common technique. >> ... >> _______________________________________________ >> U2-Users mailing list >> U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org >> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> _______________________________________________ >> U2-Users mailing list >> U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org >> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> > > > > -- > John Thompson > -- John Thompson _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
