Michael, I am currently using rsync INSTEAD of btrfs backup tools. I
really don't see anyway that it could be compatible with the backup
features of btrfs. As I noted in my post, it is definitely not a
perfect solution, but it is doing the job for me. What I REALLY want in
this regard is n-
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 12:35:30PM +0100, Michael Schuerig wrote:
> On Thursday 13 March 2014 17:29:11 George Mitchell wrote:
> > I currently use rsync to a separate drive to maintain a
> > backup copy, but it is not integrated into the array like n-way would
> > be, and is definitely not a perfe
On Thursday 13 March 2014 17:29:11 George Mitchell wrote:
> I currently use rsync to a separate drive to maintain a
> backup copy, but it is not integrated into the array like n-way would
> be, and is definitely not a perfect solution.
Could you explain how you're using rsync? I was just about t
On 2014-03-14 09:46, George Mitchell wrote:
> Actually, an interesting concept would be to have the initial two drive
> RAID 1 mirrored by 2 additional drives in 4-way configuration on a
> second machine at a remote location on a private high speed network with
> both machines up 24/7. In that cas
George Mitchell posted on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 06:46:19 -0700 as excerpted:
> Actually, an interesting concept would be to have the initial two drive
> RAID 1 mirrored by 2 additional drives in 4-way configuration on a
> second machine at a remote location on a private high speed network with
> both m
Actually, an interesting concept would be to have the initial two drive
RAID 1 mirrored by 2 additional drives in 4-way configuration on a
second machine at a remote location on a private high speed network with
both machines up 24/7. In that case, if such a configuration would
work, either ma
Michael Schuerig posted on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 09:56:20 +0100 as excerpted:
[Duncan posted...]
>> 3) Disconnect the backup device(s). (Don't btrfs device delete, this
>> would remove the copy. Just disconnect.)
Hmm... Looking back at what I wrote...
Presumably either have the filesystem unmount
On Friday 14 March 2014 06:42:27 Duncan wrote:
> N-way-mirroring is actually my most hotly anticipated feature for a
> different reason[2], but for you it would work like this:
>
> 1) Setup the 3-way (or 4-way if preferred) mirroring and balance to
> ensured copies of all data on all devices.
>
Michael Schuerig posted on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:12:44 +0100 as excerpted:
> My backup use case is different from the what has been recently
> discussed in another thread. I'm trying to guard against hardware
> failure and other causes of destruction.
>
> I have a btrfs raid1 filesystem spread over
On Mar 13, 2014, at 7:14 PM, Lists wrote:
>
> I'm assuming that BTRFS send/receive works similar to ZFS's similarly named
> feature.
Similar yes but not all options are the same between them. e.g. zfs send -R
replicates all descendent file systems. I don't think zfs requires volumes,
filesys
See comments at the bottom:
On 03/13/2014 05:29 PM, George Mitchell wrote:
On 03/13/2014 04:03 PM, Michael Schuerig wrote:
On Thursday 13 March 2014 16:04:33 Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mar 13, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Michael Schuerig
wrote:
On Thursday 13 March 2014 14:48:55 Andrew Skretvedt wrote:
On 03/13/2014 04:03 PM, Michael Schuerig wrote:
On Thursday 13 March 2014 16:04:33 Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mar 13, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Michael Schuerig
wrote:
On Thursday 13 March 2014 14:48:55 Andrew Skretvedt wrote:
On 2014-Mar-13 14:28, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 08:12:44PM +
On Thursday 13 March 2014 16:04:33 Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Michael Schuerig
wrote:
> > On Thursday 13 March 2014 14:48:55 Andrew Skretvedt wrote:
> >> On 2014-Mar-13 14:28, Hugo Mills wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 08:12:44PM +0100, Michael Schuerig wrote:
>
On Mar 13, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Michael Schuerig wrote:
> On Thursday 13 March 2014 14:48:55 Andrew Skretvedt wrote:
>> On 2014-Mar-13 14:28, Hugo Mills wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 08:12:44PM +0100, Michael Schuerig wrote:
My backup use case is different from the what has been recently
On Thursday 13 March 2014 14:48:55 Andrew Skretvedt wrote:
> On 2014-Mar-13 14:28, Hugo Mills wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 08:12:44PM +0100, Michael Schuerig wrote:
> >> My backup use case is different from the what has been recently
> >> discussed in another thread. I'm trying to guard again
On 2014/03/13 09:48 PM, Andrew Skretvedt wrote:
On 2014-Mar-13 14:28, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 08:12:44PM +0100, Michael Schuerig wrote:
I have a btrfs raid1 filesystem spread over two disks. I want to backup
this filesystem regularly and efficiently to an external disk (same
m
On 2014-Mar-13 14:28, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 08:12:44PM +0100, Michael Schuerig wrote:
My backup use case is different from the what has been recently
discussed in another thread. I'm trying to guard against hardware
failure and other causes of destruction.
I have a btrfs ra
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 08:12:44PM +0100, Michael Schuerig wrote:
>
> My backup use case is different from the what has been recently
> discussed in another thread. I'm trying to guard against hardware
> failure and other causes of destruction.
>
> I have a btrfs raid1 filesystem spread over tw
My backup use case is different from the what has been recently
discussed in another thread. I'm trying to guard against hardware
failure and other causes of destruction.
I have a btrfs raid1 filesystem spread over two disks. I want to backup
this filesystem regularly and efficiently to an ext
19 matches
Mail list logo
