Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 30 Mar 2005 06:16:26 -0800
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Andrea Venturoli <ml.diespammer@netfence.it>
Cc:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: mksnap_ffs woes
Message-ID:  <20050330141626.GB73682@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <424ACEF8.60601@netfence.it>
References:  <424AACD1.3060802@netfence.it> <20050330134259.GA66640@xor.obsecurity.org> <424ACEF8.60601@netfence.it>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--mojUlQ0s9EVzWg2t
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 05:08:24PM +0100, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
>=20
> >mksnap_ffs may sometimes take a long time (order of tens of minutes)
> >to generate the snapshot.  During this time, other writes to the
> >filesystem may be suspended.  Are you sure this isn't what you're
> >seeing?
>=20
> I am not sure, but I don't think so.
>=20
> First of all, while I would not expect an exactly deterministic=20
> behaviour, I still find it strange that most of the times it works=20
> within seconds, and occasionally it might need so long! Then again, I do=
=20
> not have enough insight to explain why it would or why it shouldn't.

It's possible you're seeing deadlock bugs in the snapshot code; you'd
need to compile your system with DDB support and obtain traceback
information as described in the developers' handbook chapter on kernel
debugging.

> Lastly, if what you say is true, that "writes to the filesytem may be=20
> suspended" for that long, then I don't see much point in using this=20
> feature. At least, it is not one that suits *my* needs: our clients must=
=20
> be up 24/7; if that happens they will time out and someone will need to=
=20
> go there and powercycle them.

The snapshot code was intended to support background fsck and that
alone.  It's also optionally used by the dump code, but it was not
written as a general-purpose live filesystem snapshot service.

> Am I going in the wrong direction then?
> Are there other alternatives for live backups?

Plenty, if you don't demand an instantaneous image of the backup
image.

> Is there some sort of more detailed documentation (tutorials, howtos,=20
> ...) on this topic?

The pros and cons of the snapshot code have been discussed on the
mailing lists, and there is a (slightly outdated) information file
here: /usr/src/sys/ufs/ffs/README.snapshot

Kris
--mojUlQ0s9EVzWg2t
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFCSrS6Wry0BWjoQKURApazAJ9q9D562ygA6L9HrDMJkG0YgGbzzACdGQdJ
7gU8/2dKSsMgjdhXVSddfZw=
=xQ8J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--mojUlQ0s9EVzWg2t--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050330141626.GB73682>