Chris Siebenmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The first issue alone makes 'zfs send' completely unsuitable for the
> purposes that we currently use ufsdump. I don't believe that we've lost
> a complete filesystem in years, but we restore accidentally deleted
> files all the time. (And snapshots are not the answer, as it is common
> that a user doesn't notice the problem until well after the fact.)
My impression is that the "only" real problem with incrementals from ufsdump or
star is that you would like to have a database that tells you in which
incremental a specific file with a specific time stamp may be found.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
