Dale Ghent wrote:
ZFS we all know is just more than a dumb fs like UFS is. As mentioned, it has metadata in the form of volume options and whatnot. So, sure, I can still use my Legato/NetBackup/Amanda and friends to back that data up... but if the worst were to happen and I find myself having to restore not only data, but the volume structure of a pool as well, then there a huge time sink and an important one to avoid in a production environment. Immediately, I see quick way to relieve this (note I did not necessarily imply "resolve this"):
I'll call your bluff. Is a zpool create any different for backup than the original creation? Neither ufsdump nor tar-like programs do a mkfs or tunefs. In those cases, the sys admin still has to create the file system using whatever volume manager they wish. Creating a zpool is trivial by comparison. If you don't like it, then modifying a zpool on the fly afterwards is also, for most operations, quite painless. What is missing is some of the default parameters, such as enabling compression, which do not exist on UFS. This is in the pipeline, but it is hardly a show-stopper. -- richard _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
