[rescue] Mounting and Dumping
mike at blackhairy.demon.co.uk
Wed Jan 14 14:34:06 CST 2004
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:04:39 -0500, Sheldon T. Hall wrote:
> Janet L. Campbell writes ...
> > On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Sheldon T. Hall wrote:
> > > So ... in reading the ufsdump doco for Solaris 7, it really
> > It depends on what's happening to the filesystems at the time. The
> > principle danger of dumping a mounted filesystem is that writes may
> > make the dump inconsistent. This is *usually* not a big problem
> > when the machine is otherwise quiet.
> Inconsistent, I can stand, Unreadable, I can't. Will the fs activity
> while dumping a mounted filesystem make the dump unusable, or just
If you find a reliable answer, I'd be very interested in hearing about
it. I wouldn't use ufsdump myself despite ufsrestore having one of the
nicest interfaces for emergency restored I've seen.
A few years ago I was converting work's backup script from Digital Unix
to Solaris and spent a long time looking into ufsdump. At the time I
couldn't find a definitive answer to this problem. I seem to recall
someone commenting that a write to a filesystem that is being dumped can
cause the entire dump to be useless if you're unlucky.
I don't like relying on my luck when it comes to backups.
(Read all the way through all the responses to that one)
Of course using fssnap is a whole different ball game.
Yes I know I'm not in agreement with the majority view here which means
I'm probably wrong :)
> > Maybe. If you're dumping a partition with lots of small files, the
> > Classic may just not be able to keep up with the DLT drive because
> > of disk speed and fragmentation.
> Jochen Kunz suggests the same thing: the Classic isn't as fast at the
> tape. He also suggested disableing compression to help it stream, and
> I'll try that.
Disabling compression on the DLT drive or the Classic ? The DLT drive
should be able to stream with it's compression on. Not streaming is
(long term) a recipe for dead tapes and drives.
More information about the rescue