[rescue] Oracle making just a little harder to keep old machines in use
stephane.tsacas at gmail.com
Sun May 9 12:53:46 CDT 2010
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 17:35, Patrick Finnegan <pat at computer-refuge.org>wrote:
> On Sunday 09 May 2010, Stiphane Tsacas wrote:
> > On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 17:05, Patrick Finnegan <pat at computer-
> > > On Saturday 08 May 2010, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 12:01:24PM -0400, Joshua Boyd wrote:
> > > > > What do you need from a zfsdump that zfs send won't do?
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > And perhaps this is just my lack of zfs savvy speaking, but it's
> > > > not clear to me yet how to do incremental backups using this
> > > > method. One of the systems that I run has ~40T of storage mostly
> > > > consisting of large files that are very infrequently modified (in
> > > > some cases: never) and I'd like to leverage that into making
> > > > backups run as quickly as possible and occupy as little space as
> > > > possible.
> > >
> > > Why won't (GNU) tar work? It does everything that you say you are
> > > wanting.
> > >
> > > Pat
> > tar main drawback is that it may modify the directories/files access
> > time, while *dump will open the disk raw device, and read blocks
> > from there.
> Is access time really that important?
Yes, since you don't want to modify your file system state each time you do
Finding old and/or never accessed files is important.
What do you expect from a system that originally doesn't even know about
file creation time?
More information about the rescue