On 17/06/2021 13:27, Martin A. Brooks via GLLUG wrote:
On 2021-06-17 11:58, Alistair Mann via GLLUG wrote:
My solution was to write a FUSE filesystem
You were wrong the moment you decided that writing a filesystem was a
good idea.
Lol! This is so - there's absolutely astonishing abuses of
On 17/06/2021 13:27, Martin A. Brooks via GLLUG wrote:
You were wrong the moment you decided that writing a filesystem was a
good idea.
Ouch.
--
GLLUG mailing list
GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk
https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
On 2021-06-17 11:58, Alistair Mann via GLLUG wrote:
My solution was to write a FUSE filesystem
You were wrong the moment you decided that writing a filesystem was a
good idea.
--
GLLUG mailing list
GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk
https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
My solution was to write a FUSE filesystem for the backup server whereby
successive changes to a file result in a linkedlist-like chain of files
with the latest link being the latest copy of the file. Deletes are
handled similarly with the latest link indicating the deletion but not
otherwise
We have a different methodology where the live server initiated the
backup, but once each set is completed completed sets a flag on the
backup server and the backup server then takes a copy using hard links,
so that allows us to have a whole bunch of historical copies that cannot
be accessed
