On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 13:15:37 +0200 joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote:
> dick hoogendijk <d...@nagual.nl> wrote: > > > FULL backup to a file > > zfs snapshot -r rp...@0908 > > zfs send -Rv rp...@0908 > /net/remote/rpool/snaps/rpool.0908 > > > > INCREMENTAL backup to a file > > zfs snapshot -i rp...@0908 rp...@090822 > > zfs send -Rv rp...@090822 > /net/remote/rpool/snaps/rpool.090822 > > > > As I understand the latter gives a file with changes between 0908 > > and > > 090822. Is this correct? > > What do you understand by "incremental backup"? I do not want to process the first zfs send option everytime I make a backup of my root pool. It simply takes too long and too much space. I do, however, want to be able to restore my root pool in case of a disastre, as good and recent as possible. > If you like to be able to restore single files, I recommend you to > use "star" for the incrementals. I have no need for restoring single files. I use star / rsync for this already. I want to be able to restore my root pool in case of disk failure. So, I can always do a zfs send of the whole root, but I thought it might be possible to do this onece, followed by incremental differences. -- Dick Hoogendijk -- PGP/GnuPG key: 01D2433D + http://nagual.nl/ | SunOS 10u7 5/09 | OpenSolaris 2009.06 rel + All that's really worth doing is what we do for others (Lewis Carrol) _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
