> At this point, I will repeat my recommendation about > using > zpool-in-files as a backup (staging) target. > Depending where you > ost, and how you combine the files, you can achieve > these scenarios > without clunkery, and with all the benefits a zpool > provides. >
This is another good scheme. I see a number of points to consider when choosing amongst the various suggestions for backing up zfs file systems. In no particular order, I have these: 1. Does it work in place, or need an intermediate copy on disk? 2. Does it respect ACLs? 3. Does it respect zfs snapshots? 4. Does it allow random access to files, or only full file system restore? 5. Can it (mostly) survive partial data corruption? 6. Can it handle file systems larger than a single tape? 7. Can it stream to multiple tapes in parallel? 8. Does it understand the concept of incremental backups? I still see this as a serious gap in the offering of zfs. Clearly so do many other people, as there are a lot of methods offered to handle at least some of the above. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
