On 01/28/11 02:37 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
Let's go into that a little bit. If you're piping zfs send directly into
zfs receive, then it is an ideal backup method. But not everybody can
afford the disk necessary to do that, so people are tempted to "zfs send"
to
a file or tape. There are precisely two reasons why that's not
"officially"
recommended:
1- When you want to restore, it's all or nothing. You can't selectively
restore a single file.
2- When you want to restore, it's all or nothing. If a single bit is
corrupt in the data stream, the whole stream is lost.
Regarding point #2, I contend that zfs send is better than ufsdump. I
would
prefer to discover corruption in the backup, rather than blindly restoring
it undetected. Also, since the invention of zstreamdump, you are able to
detect any corruption during stream generation... And you are able to
verify integrity of a stream after it is written to its destination. All
Hi,
Be careful with zstreamdump, it has bug, at least in build 134, and I
see the related CR is still open
(http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6933259).
Regards,
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
