[Star-users] timestamp(?) problems with incremental dumps
Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de
Tue Mar 11 17:11:41 CET 2008
Lasse Kliemann <lasse-list-star-users at mail.plastictree.net> wrote:
> But I tried something else, maybe it's interesting:
> - Filesystem A is busy, take snapshot S from it.
> - Synchronize filesystem B with S using 'rsync -axH --inplace'.
> - Remount B read-only.
> - Take an incremental dump from B.
> - Restore the incremental dump(s) taken this way to a filesystem C.
> - Compare the contents of S with C using diffopts=\!ctime,\!lmtime,\!atime.
> - Release S.
> - Start over after some time.
> So, in B we keep a kind of "mirror" of A, which has the advantage that we can
> mount it read-only and that it is not a snapshot. B is not changed between
> iterations; all we do with it is one run of rsync before each dump. (With
> rsync 3.0.0 a patch  is suggested for this.)
Could you tell us how the speed of a rsync call and an incremental star
dump/restore compare? Which is faster and what is the difference?
EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
More information about the Star-users