On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Matthew Dillon <[email protected]> wrote: > : > :Is it ok to move the snapshots back to the PFS and put symlinks from > :/var/hammer to it? > > The softlinks are no longer the definitive recording of the snapshots > in version 4. The definitive recording is in meta-data in the HAMMER > filesystem and should get mirrored (though I haven't tested this well) > along with the rest of the filesystem. >
Thank you so much matt for the detailed explanation :-))) Yes I checked it for both Master and Slave PFS the meta-data does get mirrored. Some of them has 'migrated' at the end of it what does it mean? 0x000000017627d370 2010-02-02 03:18:00 IST migrated 0x0000000176b5ef40 2010-02-03 03:18:00 IST migrated 0x00000001782a85e0 2010-02-04 03:18:21 IST 0x00000001782d0370 2010-02-05 03:18:17 IST > You can access all the snapshot TIDs using 'hammer snapls <fs>', > on the master or on any slave. They can be regenerated on the > mirroring target's /var, in fact, though you'd have to write a > little script (a nice side project would be to have a hammer > utility directive which regenerates the softlinks from the > meta-data), so they won't be lost. > is it possible to access the snapshot If I know the TID? So as of now is it that I lost all the snapshots for my slave and I have to manually take snapshots of of the Slave PFS and store it some where outside the PFS untill something is implemented for regeneration? > > So, I do not recommend putting the softlinks on each HAMMER FS. Sure, > /var is a hammer filesystem too but you get the idea. > Yes Matt thanks :-) --Siju
