I second Rodney's suggestion. Disclaimer: his office is next to mine ;)
Being able to have snapshots of a volume or multiple backups of a volume
from different times.
I think the simplest approach would be to clone a volume and give a new
but predictable name like vol.backup1 or vol.b20061207
I don't have a specific need for this at the moment, but it's in my
"nice to have" category.
Jason
Rodney M Dyer wrote:
I think it would be more interesting to pursue something like the
"Shadow Volume Copy Services"...
http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsServer/en/library/2b0d2457-b7d8-42c3-b6c9-59c145b7765f1033.mspx?mfr=true
Yea I know, pie in the sky problems.
Kidding aside, our upper management is really getting into the kinds
of services provided by companies like Xythos:
http://www.xythos.com/home/xythos/index.html The services Xythos
provides make traditional file systems look "outdated". However this
is junk to me because it's web based stuff.
I'm just an old codger... Hey you kids, get off my lawn!
Rodney
At 02:21 PM 12/7/2006, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, December 07, 2006 01:34:50 PM -0500 Jeffrey Altman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I would believe that what would be desired is a non-permanent delete
>> in the r/w volume in which the file/directory would be marked with
>> a new attribute that means deleted but not reclaimed.
>>
>> Files/directories would be automatically reclaimed as they bump up
>> against their quota.
>>
>> New RPCs would be required to support the undelete operations:
>>
>> * purge all deleted but unclaimed files/dirs
>>
>> * undelete the specified file/dir
>>
>> * list files/dirs that can be undeleted
>
> Actually, we're only talking about files here. A directory can't be
> deleted in the first place unless it's empty, and the undelete
operation
> for an empty directory is the same as the directory creation
operation.
A delete operation on a directory filled with files that have been
deleted but not yet reclaimed needs to be marked with the new attribute.
Otherwise, you lose the ability to undelete the files stored within it.
> Life gets interesting when multiple files with the same name have been
> deleted, but maybe you don't care about that (I would).
Not so interesting. The function to list the entries reports multiple
files with the same name.
> I suspect that the improvement over traditional backup volumes is
> relatively small, and while it would be a "cool" feature, I think
there
> are probably others on which the time would be better spent. Buy hey,
> it's your time, not mine...
I completely agree that there are many more important things for time
to be spent on that are causing users real problems and not just
inconveniences.
Jeffrey Altman
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
