On 16-Jan-10, at 6:51 PM, Mike Gerdts wrote:
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Toby Thain
<t...@telegraphics.com.au> wrote:
On 16-Jan-10, at 7:30 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
I am considering building a modest sized storage system with
zfs. Some
of the data on this is quite valuable, some small subset to be
backed
up "forever", and I am evaluating back-up options with that in
mind.
You don't need to store the "zfs send" data stream on your backup
media.
This would be annoying for the reasons mentioned - some risk of
being able
to restore in future (although that's a pretty small risk) and
inability
to
restore with any granularity, i.e. you have to restore the whole
FS if you
restore anything at all.
A better approach would be "zfs send" and pipe directly to "zfs
receive"
on
the external media. This way, in the future, anything which can
read ZFS
can read the backup media, and you have granularity to restore
either the
whole FS, or individual things inside there.
There have also been comments about the extreme fragility of the
data stream
compared to other archive formats. In general it is strongly
discouraged for
these purposes.
Yet it is used in ZFS flash archives on Solaris 10
I can see the temptation, but isn't it a bit under-designed? I think
Mr Nordin might have ranted about this in the past...
--Toby
and are slated for
use in the successor to flash archives. This initial proposal seems
to imply using the same mechanism for a system image backup (instead
of just system provisioning).
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/caiman-discuss/2010-January/
015909.html
--
Mike Gerdts
http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
