From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Wed Dec 21 19:02:43 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9455BC8B2BA for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 19:02:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexmiroslav@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vk0-x230.google.com (mail-vk0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F52710CC for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 19:02:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexmiroslav@gmail.com) Received: by mail-vk0-x230.google.com with SMTP id 137so154435725vkl.0 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 11:02:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HBppi4uvGypKNNK61f1LCwKIp2pclkTU+OMbyR5rRLY=; b=nv4/yKImZkxs1Bl4K7lA0TGG4DM2j5jMJgfwDkMys/4s/WzZ0QWt14EXl5QWazUUl8 QU6eWgRP6SuhWpKo3M/H+xnfhDWiDe2a3hR/0laguRLsoNlMRydYqEw4EAyn1YoJ3+gb 3kE9INt3NtyfR7Fk3Edj35jFe3XJPFZf7oICvJ90eIXQp8nZaM+FiTV3wriCpd5OXyq9 JU9r743UWJ9uoyjJaaXzCVWva07T1/fa/97j+HHsPBLUinXgNZHhB0NQ4DgFhxJhHcof WewIHKU7OKZ/h1IQmLjOqqdCIR9EEo2RlGSZDmtN9ZFGjzN4ClpGmjtdIgqBgHpWcVhv 09qQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HBppi4uvGypKNNK61f1LCwKIp2pclkTU+OMbyR5rRLY=; b=frSPCRdGjgEInUsZTlYTVb58LSVCjb6zJZaqadJi9B2wV5XLXbzIM95AA9ycSdRRdx OyNHQ8iozfp2KB4eLhEV7HnyRUwlv/50O301UHFh7BLbh5/1JgsKxUuiCqKsBEWisZbf G193PiB/jtQzL66t3hYsq25TomJcBhMDwLgRHJ/B5/aabGY3YAs6ATtoJ/NQz/8Uf3QB fAX2vbnHuFnUsOGzdoN2cYPKVNHqnKocL0tTplXceie3pv5S24wX9Fj6IMSp3SFBcsun e0mfjrqLPAen2ckYl8gv1D9E9AvI/tpQMLnf0Vd+YoIV8Of+mRSd+HvNmoFXVYm26rez AYgw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKRNmPg2Qs232DLyDDAreP3BFWj0C4Zl9nR07dYfuknyRNAWSYn4OMecCa/9TJ6Af86WQ+0ZZpjQM02+A== X-Received: by 10.31.52.5 with SMTP id b5mr2542145vka.65.1482346962452; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 11:02:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.159.39.130 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 11:02:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <867f6u22vv.fsf@gmail.com> References: <867f6u22vv.fsf@gmail.com> From: Aleksandr Miroslav Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 11:02:42 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: zfs (zxfer) replication -- "holes" in backups? To: Malcolm Matalka Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 19:02:43 -0000 On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:36 AM, Malcolm Matalka wrote: > I ran into this problem where the snapshots the machine that was backing > up to named the snapshots the same thing so zxfer thought the transfer > didn't need to happen. I "solved" this by putting the hostname in the > snapshot name. zfstools determines whether or not to snap a filesystem by looking at a property. In my particular case, I didn't reset this property before zfs sending the snap to another machine running zfstools. Now that it is working properly, I'm happy with the setup. Alex