Edward Ned Harvey <sola...@nedharvey.com> wrote:
> > I still believe that a set of compressed incremental star archives give
> > you
> > more features.
>
> Big difference there is that in order to create an incremental star archive,
> star has to walk the whole filesystem or folder that's getting backed up,
> and do a "stat" on every file to see which files have changed since the last
> backup run. If you have a large filesystem, that can take a very long time.
Star implements this in a very effective way (by using libfind) that is even
faster that the find(1) implementation from Sun.
The big advantage with star is that you get OS and filesystem independent
archives that are compatible with recent POSIX standards and thus can be read
on any POSIX.1-2001 compliant OS even if you don't have a star binary handy.
> I run incremental zfs send & receive, and it completes typically in a minute
> or two.
Did you make a test with star?
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
