Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
On Tuesday 04 April 2006 06:40, Peter Jeremy wrote: On Tue, 2006-Apr-04 11:12:03 +0100, Khaled Hussain wrote: Why does everyone talk about dump+restore as a pair? I thought it was possible just to dump a filesystem to a different hard disk i.e. dump -0a -f /dev/ad2 / It is. But /dev/ad2 will have a dumpfile on it, not a filesystem. The only thing that can then read /dev/ad2 is restore. Also, how can I find out which /boot/boot# file a freebsd system is using by default? None of the ones in the filesystem - these files are embedded into the beginning of the hard disk. One of boot0, boot0sio or mbr is located in absolute sector 0 of the disk. boot1 is located in sector 0 of the bootable slice boot2 is located in the (I think) sectors 1-15 of partition a. Actually, boot1 + boot2 occupy sectors 0,2-15 of the bootable slice (the a partition starts at the start of the slice to be confusing) with the actual disklabel table in sector 1 of the slice. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ Power Users Use the Power to Serve = http://www.FreeBSD.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
On Wed, 2006-Apr-05 14:53:55 -0400, John Baldwin wrote: boot2 is located in the (I think) sectors 1-15 of partition a. Actually, boot1 + boot2 occupy sectors 0,2-15 of the bootable slice (the a partition starts at the start of the slice to be confusing) with the actual disklabel table in sector 1 of the slice. The bit that threw me was that boot2 is 15 sectors long and ends in sector 15. I gather it has a copy of boot1 embedded in it. -- Peter Jeremy ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 15:15, Peter Jeremy wrote: On Wed, 2006-Apr-05 14:53:55 -0400, John Baldwin wrote: boot2 is located in the (I think) sectors 1-15 of partition a. Actually, boot1 + boot2 occupy sectors 0,2-15 of the bootable slice (the a partition starts at the start of the slice to be confusing) with the actual disklabel table in sector 1 of the slice. The bit that threw me was that boot2 is 15 sectors long and ends in sector 15. I gather it has a copy of boot1 embedded in it. Yes, there is now a /boot/boot file that is boot1 + boot2 glued together in a single blob. It used to be that boot1 was in sector 0 and boot2 in 2-15, but with ufs2 boot2 got slightly bigger, so we now make them a blob IIRC to get some extra space. phk@ did that change. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ Power Users Use the Power to Serve = http://www.FreeBSD.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
Hi guys, Why does everyone talk about dump+restore as a pair? I thought it was possible just to dump a filesystem to a different hard disk i.e. dump -0a -f /dev/ad2 / Also, how can I find out which /boot/boot# file a freebsd system is using by default? Kind Regards Khaled -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of M. Warner Losh Sent: 29 March 2006 05:04 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Patrick Tracanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : : I heard its faster if you use two dd's; i.e: : : # dd if=/dev/ad0 bs=64k | dd of=/dev/ad1 bs=64k : : allowing read and write to proceed in parallel. : : : that's what ddd and 'team' are for. : I don't know if ddd is in the ports as it may clash inname with teh : debugger ddd : They internally fork and use several processes synchronised in some manner. : : Isn't dump+restore and a couple of fdisk+bsdlabel trick to copy the : source partitioning a better choice to clone this HDD? Yes. That's what I *ALWAYS* do, because hard drives are never the exact same size. fdisk -I makes the fdisk part easy. bsdlabel -R makes the disklabel cloning relatively painless. dump + restore is slow but reliabe. Warner ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
On Tue, 2006-Apr-04 11:12:03 +0100, Khaled Hussain wrote: Why does everyone talk about dump+restore as a pair? I thought it was possible just to dump a filesystem to a different hard disk i.e. dump -0a -f /dev/ad2 / It is. But /dev/ad2 will have a dumpfile on it, not a filesystem. The only thing that can then read /dev/ad2 is restore. Also, how can I find out which /boot/boot# file a freebsd system is using by default? None of the ones in the filesystem - these files are embedded into the beginning of the hard disk. One of boot0, boot0sio or mbr is located in absolute sector 0 of the disk. boot1 is located in sector 0 of the bootable slice boot2 is located in the (I think) sectors 1-15 of partition a. -- Peter Jeremy ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
Hi Jeremy, Thanks for the clarification...at the moment I am trying to set a boot manager on my disk but am unsure which slice to set as the default boot selection when using the boot0cfg command. boot0cfg -Bv -s? ad2 disklabel -r ad0 (on a different bsd system) gives: 8 partitions: #size offsetfstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg] a: 20480004.2BSD0 0 0 # (Cyl.0 - 12*) b: 2104640 204800 swap# (Cyl. 12*- 143*) c: 1172583720unused0 0# (Cyl.0 - 7298*) e:40960 23094404.2BSD0 0 0 # (Cyl. 143*- 146*) f: 114907972 23504004.2BSD0 0 0 # (Cyl. 146*- 7298*) Am I correct in assuming that a: is slice 1, b: is slice 2, etc? If so then the slice to make bootable would be slice 3 in the following setup (which is my disk): 8 partitions: #size offsetfstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg] b: 2048642 310528000 swap # (Cyl. 19329*- 19456*) c: 3125766420unused0 0# (Cyl.0 - 19456*) e: 31052800004.2BSD0 0 0 # (Cyl.0 - 19329*) Kind Regards Khaled -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Peter Jeremy Sent: 04 April 2006 11:41 To: Khaled Hussain Cc: FreeBSD Hackers Subject: Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD On Tue, 2006-Apr-04 11:12:03 +0100, Khaled Hussain wrote: Why does everyone talk about dump+restore as a pair? I thought it was possible just to dump a filesystem to a different hard disk i.e. dump -0a -f /dev/ad2 / It is. But /dev/ad2 will have a dumpfile on it, not a filesystem. The only thing that can then read /dev/ad2 is restore. Also, how can I find out which /boot/boot# file a freebsd system is using by default? None of the ones in the filesystem - these files are embedded into the beginning of the hard disk. One of boot0, boot0sio or mbr is located in absolute sector 0 of the disk. boot1 is located in sector 0 of the bootable slice boot2 is located in the (I think) sectors 1-15 of partition a. -- Peter Jeremy ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Khaled Hussain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : Why does everyone talk about dump+restore as a pair? I thought it was : possible just to dump a filesystem to a different hard disk i.e. : dump -0a -f /dev/ad2 / because that will create a dump file on ad2, not a filesystem that can be read by the kernel. : Also, how can I find out which /boot/boot# file a freebsd system is using by : default? I don't understand that question. Warner : Kind Regards : : Khaled : : -Original Message- : From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of M. Warner Losh : Sent: 29 March 2006 05:04 : To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org : Subject: Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD : : : In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Patrick Tracanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : : : : I heard its faster if you use two dd's; i.e: : : : : # dd if=/dev/ad0 bs=64k | dd of=/dev/ad1 bs=64k : : : : allowing read and write to proceed in parallel. : : : : : : that's what ddd and 'team' are for. : : I don't know if ddd is in the ports as it may clash inname with teh : : debugger ddd : : They internally fork and use several processes synchronised : in some manner. : : : : Isn't dump+restore and a couple of fdisk+bsdlabel trick to copy the : : source partitioning a better choice to clone this HDD? : : Yes. That's what I *ALWAYS* do, because hard drives are never the : exact same size. : : fdisk -I makes the fdisk part easy. bsdlabel -R makes the disklabel : cloning relatively painless. : : dump + restore is slow but reliabe. : : Warner : ___ : freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list : http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers : To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] : : __ : This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. : For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email : __ : : : ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
Khaled Hussain wrote: Thanks for the clarification...at the moment I am trying to set a boot manager on my disk but am unsure which slice to set as the default boot selection when using the boot0cfg command. boot0cfg -Bv -s? ad2 disklabel -r ad0 (on a different bsd system) gives: 8 partitions: #size offsetfstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg] a: 20480004.2BSD0 0 0 # (Cyl.0 - 12*) b: 2104640 204800 swap# (Cyl. 12*- 143*) c: 1172583720unused0 0# (Cyl.0 - 7298*) e:40960 23094404.2BSD0 0 0 # (Cyl. 143*- 146*) f: 114907972 23504004.2BSD0 0 0 # (Cyl. 146*- 7298*) Am I correct in assuming that a: is slice 1, b: is slice 2, etc? No. The above is the label inside a single slice. a: is the first partition within that slice. Use fdisk to look at your slices. If you really are getting the above from /dev/ad2 rather than /dev/ad2sN where N is a number from 1 to 4, then it's in dedicated mode and the issue is moot, since there's no slice table. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
One further thing you might want to consider is a project out of the University of Utah called Emulab. I've been using the free client on there to dump and restore disks for a couple of years now. The advantage over dump/restore and especially dd is that it's _fast_. On my systems here I can get a GB or two per minute (admittedly over Gigabit ethernet). Also, it's designed to work over the network, making it easy to store your filesystem dumps on a central repository. http://www.emulab.net/ ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
John-Mark Gurney wrote: Patrick Tracanelli wrote this message on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:14 -0300: Daniel O'Connor wrote: On Wednesday 29 March 2006 14:34, M. Warner Losh wrote: dump + restore is slow but reliabe. Faster than dd for disks that aren't full :) It also gives you a defrag as well as allowing you to change FS options. Yes, pretty much faster for non-full disks, even compared to paralell dd(1). And we always have the -L option to snapshot and dump(1) from live file systems, what makes it an interesting and completly viable choice to clone the disks in multiuser mode (no need to go single user). It is my choice to copy a disk into one other. It is even possible to copy a disk to a slower one (again, if the source is not full and if the dst disk have enough space to store all data currently in use in the source disk), and better (customizable new partitions) results when copying to a larger second disk, when compared to dd(1). Though if you are using extended attributes, the dump/restore pair won't transfer them... :( You are right, I am afraid it is true for ACLs and other MAC modules too. Sadly dump does not know about 'em (yet?). So it is really something to consider when backin' up full disks with the dump|restore pair, if the person use more sophisticated FS attributes. -- Patrick Tracanelli FreeBSD Brasil LTDA. (31) 3281-9633 / 3281-3547 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.freebsdbrasil.com.br Long live Hanin Elias, Kim Deal! ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
On Wednesday 29 March 2006 14:34, M. Warner Losh wrote: dump + restore is slow but reliabe. Faster than dd for disks that aren't full :) It also gives you a defrag as well as allowing you to change FS options. -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C pgp5f2b3kpFVA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
Daniel O'Connor wrote: On Wednesday 29 March 2006 14:34, M. Warner Losh wrote: dump + restore is slow but reliabe. Faster than dd for disks that aren't full :) It also gives you a defrag as well as allowing you to change FS options. Yes, pretty much faster for non-full disks, even compared to paralell dd(1). And we always have the -L option to snapshot and dump(1) from live file systems, what makes it an interesting and completly viable choice to clone the disks in multiuser mode (no need to go single user). It is my choice to copy a disk into one other. It is even possible to copy a disk to a slower one (again, if the source is not full and if the dst disk have enough space to store all data currently in use in the source disk), and better (customizable new partitions) results when copying to a larger second disk, when compared to dd(1). -- Patrick Tracanelli FreeBSD Brasil LTDA. (31) 3281-9633 / 3281-3547 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.freebsdbrasil.com.br Long live Hanin Elias, Kim Deal! ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:14:19AM -0300, Patrick Tracanelli wrote: Daniel O'Connor wrote: On Wednesday 29 March 2006 14:34, M. Warner Losh wrote: dump + restore is slow but reliabe. Faster than dd for disks that aren't full :) It also gives you a defrag as well as allowing you to change FS options. Yes, pretty much faster for non-full disks, even compared to paralell dd(1). And we always have the -L option to snapshot and dump(1) from live file systems, what makes it an interesting and completly viable choice to clone the disks in multiuser mode (no need to go single user). In a prior life, I had to generate a bunch (50 or 60) disk images from a master server image. The server image was updated periodically, so we decided to always go for doing it on the fly, rather than just restoring a known-good dumpfile from some place. (Questionable in hindsight, but...) Anyhow, we were using SCSI disks, so I got a shelf full of scsi disk canisters (since we had standardized on a particular one) and then wrote a zsh script to do the dumping. Zsh has a particular ability to have it duplicate the contents of a single input stream to multiple output streams. So we would fire up one dump on the master disk, and then pipe the output to multiple copies of restore running (one per disk) simultaneously. It was way faster than doing them sequentially. And, impressive to watch the access lights on the drives when you were making seven disk drives copies at once... -Kurt ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
Patrick Tracanelli wrote this message on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:14 -0300: Daniel O'Connor wrote: On Wednesday 29 March 2006 14:34, M. Warner Losh wrote: dump + restore is slow but reliabe. Faster than dd for disks that aren't full :) It also gives you a defrag as well as allowing you to change FS options. Yes, pretty much faster for non-full disks, even compared to paralell dd(1). And we always have the -L option to snapshot and dump(1) from live file systems, what makes it an interesting and completly viable choice to clone the disks in multiuser mode (no need to go single user). It is my choice to copy a disk into one other. It is even possible to copy a disk to a slower one (again, if the source is not full and if the dst disk have enough space to store all data currently in use in the source disk), and better (customizable new partitions) results when copying to a larger second disk, when compared to dd(1). Though if you are using extended attributes, the dump/restore pair won't transfer them... :( -- John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579 All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 25 March 2006 04:42, Mike Meyer wrote: One thing: 1m is a bit small for modern systems. Or for not-so-modern systems. Since nothing else is running, you might as well use all the memory you've got, or as big as you can get a process to be. 128m or more is perfectly reasonable. It won't go any faster.. In a modern system the CPU is so much faster than the disk than anything above about 16k would be enough. I found 64k to be optimal (e.g, max performance) on most machines I heard its faster if you use two dd's; i.e: # dd if=/dev/ad0 bs=64k | dd of=/dev/ad1 bs=64k allowing read and write to proceed in parallel. Joe Koberg joe at osoft dot us ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
Joe Koberg wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 25 March 2006 04:42, Mike Meyer wrote: One thing: 1m is a bit small for modern systems. Or for not-so-modern systems. Since nothing else is running, you might as well use all the memory you've got, or as big as you can get a process to be. 128m or more is perfectly reasonable. It won't go any faster.. In a modern system the CPU is so much faster than the disk than anything above about 16k would be enough. I found 64k to be optimal (e.g, max performance) on most machines I heard its faster if you use two dd's; i.e: # dd if=/dev/ad0 bs=64k | dd of=/dev/ad1 bs=64k allowing read and write to proceed in parallel. that's what ddd and 'team' are for. I don't know if ddd is in the ports as it may clash inname with teh debugger ddd They internally fork and use several processes synchronised in some manner. Joe Koberg joe at osoft dot us ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
I heard its faster if you use two dd's; i.e: # dd if=/dev/ad0 bs=64k | dd of=/dev/ad1 bs=64k allowing read and write to proceed in parallel. that's what ddd and 'team' are for. I don't know if ddd is in the ports as it may clash inname with teh debugger ddd They internally fork and use several processes synchronised in some manner. Isn't dump+restore and a couple of fdisk+bsdlabel trick to copy the source partitioning a better choice to clone this HDD? -- Patrick Tracanelli (31) 3281-9633 / 3281-3547 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Patrick Tracanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : : I heard its faster if you use two dd's; i.e: : : # dd if=/dev/ad0 bs=64k | dd of=/dev/ad1 bs=64k : : allowing read and write to proceed in parallel. : : : that's what ddd and 'team' are for. : I don't know if ddd is in the ports as it may clash inname with teh : debugger ddd : They internally fork and use several processes synchronised in some manner. : : Isn't dump+restore and a couple of fdisk+bsdlabel trick to copy the : source partitioning a better choice to clone this HDD? Yes. That's what I *ALWAYS* do, because hard drives are never the exact same size. fdisk -I makes the fdisk part easy. bsdlabel -R makes the disklabel cloning relatively painless. dump + restore is slow but reliabe. Warner ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Vasil Dimov [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 06:19:13PM +0100, Dirk GOUDERS wrote: Without reading it, I would first try this, it's quite straightforward * boot into single user mode (enter boot -s at loader prompt) * make sure filesystems are mounted readonly (mount) dd if=/dev/ad0 of=/dev/ad1 bs=1m (where ad0 is your disk with data and ad1 is your new disk, make sure you do not swap them :) Doesn't really matter in single user mode - you'll just copy the swap over. But yeah, this procedure works fine for me in the past. One thing: 1m is a bit small for modern systems. Or for not-so-modern systems. Since nothing else is running, you might as well use all the memory you've got, or as big as you can get a process to be. 128m or more is perfectly reasonable. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
On Saturday 25 March 2006 04:42, Mike Meyer wrote: One thing: 1m is a bit small for modern systems. Or for not-so-modern systems. Since nothing else is running, you might as well use all the memory you've got, or as big as you can get a process to be. 128m or more is perfectly reasonable. It won't go any faster.. In a modern system the CPU is so much faster than the disk than anything above about 16k would be enough. -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C pgp07LoNZbjGc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
On Saturday 25 March 2006 04:42, Mike Meyer wrote: One thing: 1m is a bit small for modern systems. Or for not-so-modern systems. Since nothing else is running, you might as well use all the memory you've got, or as big as you can get a process to be. 128m or more is perfectly reasonable. It won't go any faster.. In a modern system the CPU is so much faster than the disk than anything above about 16k would be enough. I found 64k to be optimal (e.g, max performance) on most machines Timestamp: 0x4428D30F [SorAlx] http://cydem.org.ua/ ridin' VN1500-B2 ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
Hi, This is my first day on the list so please pardon me if I am on the wrong list and any mistakes I make. I would like to create a bootable clone of a HDD running BSD version 4.8. I have experience of cloning linux machines successfully but understand that freebsd is a little different. please, try to clone your disk as described in the FAQ 9.2. How do I move my system over to my huge new disk?: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/disks.html#NEW-HUGE-DISK Following that advice results in a bootable clone of your disk. Dirk ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cloning a FreeBSD HDD
On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 06:19:13PM +0100, Dirk GOUDERS wrote: Hi, This is my first day on the list so please pardon me if I am on the wrong list and any mistakes I make. I would like to create a bootable clone of a HDD running BSD version 4.8. I have experience of cloning linux machines successfully but understand that freebsd is a little different. please, try to clone your disk as described in the FAQ 9.2. How do I move my system over to my huge new disk?: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/disks.html#NEW-HUGE-DISK Without reading it, I would first try this, it's quite straightforward * boot into single user mode (enter boot -s at loader prompt) * make sure filesystems are mounted readonly (mount) dd if=/dev/ad0 of=/dev/ad1 bs=1m (where ad0 is your disk with data and ad1 is your new disk, make sure you do not swap them :) -- Vasil Dimov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Testing can show the presence of bugs, but not their absence. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
