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 perfect
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 two
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.
2)
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 unmounted
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
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
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 case,
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
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 two
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 against
On Mar 13, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Michael Schuerig michael.li...@schuerig.de 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
On Thursday 13 March 2014 16:04:33 Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mar 13, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Michael Schuerig
michael.li...@schuerig.de 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
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
michael.li...@schuerig.de wrote:
On Thursday 13 March 2014 14:48:55
On Mar 13, 2014, at 7:14 PM, Lists li...@benjamindsmith.com 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
14 matches
Mail list logo
