On Wed, 2008-04-02 19:20:09 -0400, Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 19:15 -0400, Clark wrote: > > Matt McCutchen wrote: > > > It's not clear to me how a filesystem snapshot would solve the problem. > > > It guarantees that rsync sees an instantaneous state of the filesystem, > > > but that state could still include files that are half-modified by other > > > programs. > > > > > I shut everything down so that it is not "live", do a snapshot, then let > > people go again. It is not perfect, but the snapshot process takes only > > a second or two, then people can work for the hours it takes for rsync > > to run. > > Good point. A filesystem snapshot doesn't avoid the need to stop the > services, but it greatly reduces the length of the downtime.
Live replication--one day I'll play with it again.
Another approach could be a shared device (think nbd) with a
sync-mounted filesystem.
MfG, JBG
--
Jan-Benedict Glaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49-172-7608481
Signature of: They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety,
the second : deserve neither liberty nor safety. (Ben Franklin)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
