From owner-aic7xxx Mon Mar 22 8:42:53 1999 Delivered-To: aic7xxx@freebsd.org Received: from frogger.cisco.com (frogger.cisco.com [171.69.30.57]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6FC11520C for ; Mon, 22 Mar 1999 08:42:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bjames@cisco.com) Received: (bjames@localhost) by frogger.cisco.com (8.8.5-Cisco.2-SunOS.5.5.1.sun4/8.6.5) id IAA01524; Mon, 22 Mar 1999 08:42:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1999 08:42:35 -0800 (PST) From: Beau James Message-Id: <199903221642.IAA01524@frogger.cisco.com> To: oa@razorfish.fi Subject: Re: SOFTWARE-RAID-TIPS (was: Adaptec 7890 and RAID portIII RAID controller Linux Support) Cc: aic7xxx@FreeBSD.org Sender: owner-aic7xxx@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --> It's true that separate partitions help when you're using dump/restore --> for backups, but unfortunately dump/restore are a problematic pair for --> backups (especially on Linux). Would you mind elaborating on both those points (why separate partitions help backups, and why you consider dump/restore problematic)? The only reason I can see that separate partitions help is that one might choose to do incremental backups of slowly changing partitions (e.g. /usr) more often, before doing a full backup. With most reasonable-capacity tape drives these days, that seems like a small win. As to dump/restore: I've been using them for years with no problems, but if there's a gotcha lurking out there, I'd like to know about it before it bites me. The only real complaint I have is that dump doesn't keep and restore doesn't use a tape catalog that would enable rapid positioning to the desired tape content, on a restore. Since restores are relatively infrequent events, I haven't found that too much of an issue, just a minor inconvenience. Beau To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe aic7xxx" in the body of the message