Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:04:46 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eirik_=D8verby?= <ltning@anduin.net> To: Daniel O'Connor <doconnor@gsoft.com.au> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UFS snapshot weirdness Message-ID: <5B010AC7-C292-45E6-A109-20E39B370604@anduin.net> In-Reply-To: <200802122311.43247.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> References: <79029E40-6E43-4482-8E39-D1DE49C8C53A@anduin.net> <200802122311.43247.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 12, 2008, at 1:41 PM, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, Eirik =D8verby wrote: >> I am at a total loss here. Is it re-using the first snapshot I ever >> made of this filesystem, even though I've removed it? Didn't I >> understand how to create/remove snapshots? Is this a bug? > > Sure the old md isn't hanging around by mistake or some such? Yes, I am absolutely sure of this. I considered using the snapshot tool, however I need to reduce =20 dependencies to an absolute minimum (as one target environment is very =20= strict on allowing additional software installs).. I use the snapshots to get a consistent file-backup with history. This =20= one puzzles me to no end. /Eirik > I have had people recover many files using the snapshot tool in ports > (plus a small symlink maker for samba access) and haven't noticed > issues like this. > > On the otherhand I find it can take a long time to make a snapshot > (during which time no FS access is allowed). > > --=20 > Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer > for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au > "The nice thing about standards is that there > are so many of them to choose from." > -- Andrew Tanenbaum > GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5B010AC7-C292-45E6-A109-20E39B370604>