Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 09:02:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom <tom@sdf.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: beng@lcs.mit.edu, dec@phoenix.its.rpi.edu, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Network problem with 2.2.6-STABLE Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.980505085254.21978B-100000@misery.sdf.com> In-Reply-To: <199805050753.AAA17757@usr02.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 5 May 1998, Terry Lambert wrote: > > Really? Since dump/restore requires direct knowledge of filesystem > > internals, it should probably be dropped for being a gross layering > > violation alone. Assuming it can even capture a consistant view of an > > active filesystem (I doubt it myself). dump/restore's idea of raw > > filesystem access was a mistake. > > 1) You are not supposed to use it on mounted FS's. Really? That isn't in the manual. It also makes it useless for 24x7 servers. ... > Meanwhile, break you FS's up; your backups will take less time, too. 4GB filesystems are rather limiting. It places a large burden on the administrator to constantly balance storage needs. No thanks. I'm not sure why backing up 8 x 4GB filesystems, as opposed to 1 x 32GB filesystem would be faster. I think you need to donate your time at site that runs some 24x7 servers, so you can some reality experience. > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org > --- > Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present > or previous employers. Tom To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.980505085254.21978B-100000>