Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 03:48:19 -0600 From: "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1012643300.92ce73@mired.org> To: Matt Penna <mdp1261@ritvax.isc.rit.edu> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dump, restore - active vs. inactive filesystem Message-ID: <15445.7779.734256.831416@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020128000623.028ba430@vmspop.isc.rit.edu> References: <121485656@toto.iv> <5.1.0.14.2.20020128000623.028ba430@vmspop.isc.rit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matt Penna <mdp1261@ritvax.isc.rit.edu> types: > Jonathan and Mike, thanks for the responses! Comments below: > At 07:19 PM 1/27/02 -0600, Mike Meyer wrote: > >Matt Penna <mdp1261@ritvax.isc.rit.edu> types: > > > Does mounting a filesystem read-only mean it's inactive? (I suspect not.) > >A file system mounted read-only is inactive. > Thanks for clearing that up! > > >You have three options. 1) Unmount the file system. 2) Mount the file > >system read-only. 3) Dump it in single-user mode, making sure nothing > >else is going on on the system. > What's the best way to handle this on a production system? None of the > above suggestions is practical on very large volumes that take an extended > period of time to back up or on high availability systems. "Just run the > dump while the filesystem's mounted read/write and hope for the best," is > of course always an option, though perhaps not an ideal one. :) You don't dump it, you use a raid system that supports hot-swapping the drives, and keep two (or more) copies of everything. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15445.7779.734256.831416>