Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 14:50:22 -0800 From: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu> To: Patrick Tracanelli <eksffa@freebsdbrasil.com.br> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD Message-ID: <20060329225022.GW7001@funkthat.com> In-Reply-To: <442A882B.8000207@freebsdbrasil.com.br> References: <44296F41.1050209@osoft.us> <4429972C.5030806@freebsdbrasil.com.br> <20060328.210412.18287651.imp@bsdimp.com> <200603291953.56112.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <442A882B.8000207@freebsdbrasil.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Patrick Tracanelli wrote this message on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:14 -0300:
> Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> >On Wednesday 29 March 2006 14:34, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> >
> >>dump + restore is slow but reliabe.
> >
> >
> >Faster than dd for disks that aren't full :)
> >
> >It also gives you a defrag as well as allowing you to change FS options.
>
> Yes, pretty much faster for non-full disks, even compared to paralell
> dd(1). And we always have the "-L" option to snapshot and dump(1) from
> live file systems, what makes it an interesting and completly viable
> choice to clone the disks in multiuser mode (no need to go single user).
>
> It is my choice to copy a disk into one other. It is even possible to
> copy a disk to a slower one (again, if the source is not full and if the
> dst disk have enough space to store all data currently in use in the
> source disk), and better (customizable new partitions) results when
> copying to a larger second disk, when compared to dd(1).
Though if you are using extended attributes, the dump/restore pair won't
transfer them... :(
--
John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579
"All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060329225022.GW7001>