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
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
