Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 16:32:02 +1000 From: George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org> To: Franco Fichtner <franco@lastsummer.de> Cc: reko.turja@liukuma.net, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Alternatives to rsync Message-ID: <CAKr6gn2hC7naBV5k3G6-0NDQpC4MizXuKKKq4UA%2B9LE9JeeyWA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6741E81B-8844-4881-8CEC-02A938B4427E@lastsummer.de> References: <0F5C36816EB64D09B42932E21FBC6269@RIVENDELL> <6741E81B-8844-4881-8CEC-02A938B4427E@lastsummer.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
If you want block efficient, then zfs is your friend 1) make the 'dir' be a distinct zfs filestore in the zpool 2) run zfssnap on some duty cycle 3) profit seriously: as long as the copy can be maintained readonly, in sync with the source, the block level copy of zfs snapshots under some serial/time cycle, does the job. I ran this over mbuffer to get around ssh insane packet behaviour, I only stopped when the client wanted to prune the copy and it ceased to be a zfs snapshot copy. Its much faster than rsync. Its at the filesystem block level. On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Franco Fichtner <franco@lastsummer.de> wrote: > >> On 13 Oct 2016, at 6:39 AM, reko.turja--- via freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >> The software should be relatively lightweight - no fullblown mirroring/backup is needed. Also hints how to achieve similar ends using maybe tar/ssh might do. > > Try cpdup(1). > > > Cheers, > Franco > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAKr6gn2hC7naBV5k3G6-0NDQpC4MizXuKKKq4UA%2B9LE9JeeyWA>