Hi Harry,
I was on vacation so am late to this discussion.
For this part of your question:
The zpool export/import feature is a pool-level operation for moving
the pool, disks, and data to another system.
For moving data from one pool to another pool, you would want to use
zfs send/recv, rsync, or tar, and so on.
Cindy
Harry Putnam wrote:
[...]
Harry wrote:
Now I'm wondering if the export/import sub commands might not be a
good bit faster.
Ian Collins <i...@ianshome.com> answered:
I think you are thinking of zfs send/receive.
I've never done a direct comparison, but zfs send/receive would be my
preferred way to move data between pools.
Why is that? I'm too new to know what all it encompasses (and a bit
dense to boot)
"Fajar A. Nugraha" <fa...@fajar.net> writes:
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 5:05 AM, Harry Putnam <rea...@newsguy.com> wrote:
Now I'm wondering if the export/import sub commands might not be a
good bit faster.
I believe the greatest advantage of zfs send/receive over rsync is not
about speed, but rather it's on "zfs send -R", which would (from man
page)
Generate a replication stream package, which will
replicate the specified filesystem, and all descen-
dant file systems, up to the named snapshot. When
received, all properties, snapshots, descendent file
systems, and clones are preserved.
pretty much allows you to clone a complete pool preserving its structure.
As usual, compressing the backup stream (whether rsync or zfs) might
help reduce transfer time a lot. My favorite is lzop (since it's very
fast), but gzip should work as well.
Nice... good reasons it appears.
Robert Milkowski <mi...@task.gda.pl> writes:
Hello Harry,
[...]
As Ian pointed you want zfs send|receive and not import/export.
For a first full copy zfs send not necessarily will be noticeably
faster than rsync but it depends on data. If for example you have
milions of small files zfs send could be much faster then rsync.
But it shouldn't be slower in any case.
zfs send|receive really shines when it comes to sending incremental
changes.
Now that would be something to make it stand out. Can you tell me a
bit more about that would work..I mean would you just keep receiving
only changes at one end and how do they appear on the filesystem.
There is a backup tool called `rsnapshot' that uses rsync but creates
hard links to all unchanged files and moves only changes to changed
files. This is all put in a serial directory system and ends up
taking a tiny fraction of the space that full backups would take, yet
retains a way to get to unchanged files right in the same directory
(the hard link).
Is what your talking about similar in some way.
===== * ===== * ===== * =====
To all posters... many thanks for the input.
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
