From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 22 11:39:44 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7180B16A46B for ; Tue, 22 May 2007 11:39:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C73913C45A for ; Tue, 22 May 2007 11:39:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05DD42084; Tue, 22 May 2007 13:39:40 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Tests: AWL X-Spam-Learn: disabled X-Spam-Score: 0.0/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on tim.des.no Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA7E32083; Tue, 22 May 2007 13:39:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D251957B2; Tue, 22 May 2007 13:39:39 +0200 (CEST) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: Gore Jarold References: <475187.33232.qm@web63006.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 13:39:39 +0200 In-Reply-To: <475187.33232.qm@web63006.mail.re1.yahoo.com> (Gore Jarold's message of "Mon\, 21 May 2007 12\:16\:33 -0700 \(PDT\)") Message-ID: <86r6p9xf2c.fsf@dwp.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Brooks Davis Subject: Re: VERY frustrated with FreeBSD/UFS stability - please help or comment... X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 11:39:44 -0000 Gore Jarold writes: > Specifically, I have private departmental fileservers that other > fileservers rsync to using Mike Rubel-style rsync snapshots: > > http://www.mikerubel.org/computers/rsync_snapshots/ > > This means that the remote system runs a script like this: > > ssh user@host rm -rf backup.2 > ssh user@host mv backup.1 backup.2 > ssh user@host cp -al backup.0 backup.1 > rsync /files user@host:/backup.0 This is extremely inefficient, as you have discovered. Speaking in the abstract, what you want to do every day is the following: client1% rsync --archive --delete /vol server:/backup/client1 client2% rsync --archive --delete /vol server:/backup/client2 server% for vol in /backup/* ; do mksnap_ffs $vol $vol/.snap/`date` ; done No copying or deleting; you take a snapshot when the rsync job is done, and the next day you rsync again to the same directory; only what has actually changed will be transferred, and there is no need to create and populate full copies of each directory tree every time. The easiest way to do this (if you're not afraid to run experimental code) is to use ZFS on the server, as it lets you easily create separate file systems for each client, and creates and maintains snapshots far more cheaply than FFS. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no