From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sun Apr 12 08:50:12 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD0742B6C8F for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 08:50:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from soth.netfence.it (net-2-44-121-52.cust.vodafonedsl.it [2.44.121.52]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mailserver.netfence.it", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 490QS26bjhz3KyP for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 08:50:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from guardian.ventu (guardian.guest.netfence.it [192.168.133.26]) (authenticated bits=0) by soth.netfence.it (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 03C8o5WP039687 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:50:06 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) X-Authentication-Warning: soth.netfence.it: Host guardian.guest.netfence.it [192.168.133.26] claimed to be guardian.ventu Subject: Re: Restoring and snapshots To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <56b4e678-0e66-e65b-b9d2-a2e79a5b7b6f@netfence.it> <2a0ee11a-eb32-7ae2-256f-ad1b00d1e49d@netfence.it> From: Andrea Venturoli Message-ID: Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:50:07 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.83 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 490QS26bjhz3KyP X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=netfence.it; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of ml@netfence.it designates 2.44.121.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ml@netfence.it X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.57 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:2.44.121.52:c]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[netfence.it,none]; IP_SCORE(-1.77)[ip: (-8.48), ipnet: 2.44.0.0/16(-4.24), asn: 30722(3.83), country: IT(0.03)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:30722, ipnet:2.44.0.0/16, country:IT]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 08:50:12 -0000 On 2020-04-12 10:23, David Christensen wrote: > It sounds like you are using file- and directory-level backup tools for > ZFS filesystems (?). Exactly. As I said, however, I'm having the same problem with UFS... You are focusing on ZFS, but this was not the point of the original post; it was just an example. > If you are using file- and directory-level backup tools to back up ZFS > snapshots, that definitely sounds like you are barking up the wrong > tree. Sometimes you have complex system, with several machines (some with ZFS, some with UFS, some with a mix and some not even BSD) and you need an integrated solution. Handling ZFS filesystem differently from the others would be a pain. Besides, restoring a whole filesystem if you just need a couple of files would be very inefficient.