From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 16 20:44:05 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DF7516A406 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 20:44:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from youshi10@u.washington.edu) Received: from mxout3.cac.washington.edu (mxout3.cac.washington.edu [140.142.32.166]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F72213C487 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 20:44:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from youshi10@u.washington.edu) Received: from hymn02.u.washington.edu (hymn02.u.washington.edu [140.142.13.239]) by mxout3.cac.washington.edu (8.13.7+UW06.06/8.13.7+UW07.03) with ESMTP id l4GKi4Dw010956 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 13:44:05 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hymn02.u.washington.edu (8.13.7+UW06.06/8.13.7+UW07.03) with ESMTP id l4GKi4XR018482 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 13:44:04 -0700 X-Auth-Received: from [192.55.52.2] by hymn02.u.washington.edu via HTTP; Wed, 16 May 2007 13:44:04 PDT Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 13:44:04 -0700 (PDT) From: youshi10@u.washington.edu To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20070516202735.GB97410@slackbox.xs4all.nl> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-PMX-Version: 5.3.1.294258, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.1.298604, Antispam-Data: 2007.5.16.132733 X-Uwash-Spam: Gauge=IIIIIII, Probability=7%, Report='NO_REAL_NAME 0, __CT 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0' Subject: Re: Best remote backup method? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 20:44:05 -0000 On Wed, 16 May 2007, Roland Smith wrote: > On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 01:38:13PM -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote: >> I'm presently backing up two servers in a remote location to a usb drive >> located elsewhere by using rsync over ssh (all three are FreeBSD boxes.) >> After the recent discussion about dump, I'm wondering if I would gain >> anything by using dump rather than rsync. Has anyone used both? Any >> thoughts as to which is "better" and why? >> >> The rsync command I use is: >> rsync -avz ${LOCALDIR} -e "ssh -i ${KEY}" ${REMOTEHOST}:${REMOTEDIR} > > With dumps it is easier to keep different ones around. If you rsync a > directory, all previous changes are lost. If you rsync to a different > directory every time to keep different versions, you might as well use > tar, because rsync won't save a lot of space/time in that case. And dump > will backup all ufs2 features such as flags and acls. I'm not sure if > rsync can manage that. It's also easy to compress dumps, which can save > a lot of space. Tar is expensive time-wise anyhow after a while if you use compression. Also, rsync does diffs on files, which can become expensive in terms of time. -Garrett