From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 26 19:25:14 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 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 9096116A41F for ; Sat, 26 May 2007 19:25:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from mail7.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail7.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.9]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CCB613C46E for ; Sat, 26 May 2007 19:25:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: (qmail 28207 invoked from network); 26 May 2007 19:25:14 -0000 Received: from dsl092-078-145.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO be-well.ilk.org) ([66.92.78.145]) (envelope-sender ) by mail7.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 26 May 2007 19:25:13 -0000 Received: from Lowell-Desk.lan (Lowell-Desk.lan [172.30.250.6]) by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA6A428439; Sat, 26 May 2007 15:25:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by Lowell-Desk.lan (Postfix, from userid 1147) id ACFAC1D084; Sat, 26 May 2007 15:25:07 -0400 (EDT) To: Svein Halvor Halvorsen References: <465864F4.7060500@lvor.halvorsen.cc> <20070526180336.GB34660@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <465884E3.5000500@lvor.halvorsen.cc> From: Lowell Gilbert Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 15:25:07 -0400 In-Reply-To: <465884E3.5000500@lvor.halvorsen.cc> (Svein Halvor Halvorsen's message of "Sat\, 26 May 2007 21\:05\:07 +0200") Message-ID: <44odk7fkvg.fsf@Lowell-Desk.lan> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.99 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Restore UFS snapshot 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: Sat, 26 May 2007 19:25:14 -0000 Svein Halvor Halvorsen writes: > This is also beyond the point, although I appreciate that you > suggest alternative ways to meet my objectives. dump/restore would > also require additional disk space. Not as elegant as your idea, but you can always dump from the snapshot and restore back on the filesystem. You can't use a "pristine" restore(8), and you need the extra space on the same filesystem, but it will work. Your basic idea seems quite workable as far as I can see, so it would be a Simple Matter of Programming to get it to work. [Note that since the copy-on-write mapping only goes one way, the code to do this will have to walk the whole snapshot filesystem, rebuilding inode status (and cleaning up ones that didn't exist in the snapshot) as it goes. A fair amount of work, even if nothing is tricky in theory.] Be well.