Lassi Tuura <l...@cern.ch> wrote:
> I guess what I am after is, for data which really matters to its owners and
> which they actually had to recover, did people use tar/pax archives (~ file
> level standard archive format), dump/restore (~ semi-standard format based on
> files/inodes) or zfs send/receive (~ file system block level dump), or
> something else, and why? (Regardless of how these are implemented, hobby
> scripts or enterprise tools, how they dealt with possible media failure
> issues, etc.)
star combines the advantages from ufsdump/ufsrestore (true incremental dumps)
with the advantages of a POSIX standard achive format.
Note that star is even at least 30% faster that ufsdump (although ufsdump
reads the raw disk device while star uses the official OS filesystem interface).
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
