Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 13:44:04 -0700 (PDT) From: youshi10@u.washington.edu To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best remote backup method? Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.43.0705161344040.23769@hymn02.u.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <20070516202735.GB97410@slackbox.xs4all.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 16 May 2007, Roland Smith wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 01:38:13PM -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote:
>> I'm presently backing up two servers in a remote location to a usb drive
>> located elsewhere by using rsync over ssh (all three are FreeBSD boxes.)
>> After the recent discussion about dump, I'm wondering if I would gain
>> anything by using dump rather than rsync. Has anyone used both? Any
>> thoughts as to which is "better" and why?
>>
>> The rsync command I use is:
>> rsync -avz ${LOCALDIR} -e "ssh -i ${KEY}" ${REMOTEHOST}:${REMOTEDIR}
>
> With dumps it is easier to keep different ones around. If you rsync a
> directory, all previous changes are lost. If you rsync to a different
> directory every time to keep different versions, you might as well use
> tar, because rsync won't save a lot of space/time in that case. And dump
> will backup all ufs2 features such as flags and acls. I'm not sure if
> rsync can manage that. It's also easy to compress dumps, which can save
> a lot of space.
Tar is expensive time-wise anyhow after a while if you use compression.
Also, rsync does diffs on files, which can become expensive in terms of time.
-Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.43.0705161344040.23769>