On Jan 20, 2010, at 3:15 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Richard Elling <richard.ell...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> >>> ufsdump/restore was perfect in that regard. The lack of equivalent >>> functionality is a big problem for the situations where this functionality >>> is a business requirement. >> >> How quickly we forget ufsdump's limitations :-). For example, it is not >> supported >> for use on an active file system (known data corruption possibility) and >> UFS snapshots are, well, a poor hack and often not usable for backups. >> As the ufsdump(1m) manpage says, > > It seems you forgot that zfs also needs snapshots. There is nothing bad with > snapshots.
Yes, snapshots are a good thing. But most people who try fssnap on the UFS root file system will discover that it doesn't work; for reasons mentioned in the NOTES section of fssnap_ufs(1m). fssnap_ufs is simply a butt-ugly hack. So if you believe you can reliably use ufsdump to store a DR copy of root for a 7x24x365 production environment, then you probably believe the Backup Fairy will leave a coin under your pillow when your restore fails :-) Fortunately, ZFS snapshot do the right thing. -- richard _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
