Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2013 23:49:59 +0100 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: Matthias Petermann <matthias@d2ux.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: backups using rsync Message-ID: <87vc902noo.fsf@kobe.laptop> In-Reply-To: <20130305203022.Horde.dksye196oEwlUQ41iOTg2Q9@d2ux.org> (Matthias Petermann's message of "Tue, 05 Mar 2013 20:30:22 %2B0100") References: <6126.1362396930@server1.tristatelogic.com> <20130305160021.GA9376@saturn> <20130305203022.Horde.dksye196oEwlUQ41iOTg2Q9@d2ux.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 20:30:22 +0100, Matthias Petermann <matthias@d2ux.org> wrote: > Hello, > Zitat von Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>: > >> If this is a UFS2 filesystem, it may be a good idea to snapshot the >> filesystem, and then rsync-backup the snapshot instead. > > Last time I tried UFS2 snapshots I found out two serious limitations. > The first is it doesn't work when UFS Journaling is used. The second is > that taking a snapshop on a large filesystem can cause parts of the > system to freeze for many minutes up to hours when accessing files > part of the snapshot, depending on the size of the filesystem. > That's why I could not use it on my server with > 1TB UFS2. > > Did this improve in the last year? (I guess my experience is from the > time around 9.0 release). Hi Matthias, Unfortunately I don't know if snapshots for such large filesystems are faster now. I've only used UFS2 snapshots in about 10x times smaller filesystems here.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?87vc902noo.fsf>