Ok, so, after reading a bit more of this discussion and after playing around at the weekend, i have a couple of questions to ask...
1: Do my pools need to be the same? for example, the pool in the datacenter is 2 1Tb drives in Mirror. in house i have 5 200Gb virtual drives in RAIDZ1, giving 800Gb usable. If i am backing up stuff to the home server, can i still do a ZFS Send, even though underlying system is different? 2: If i give out a partition as an iSCSI LUN, can this be ZFS Sended as normal, or is there any difference? Thanks. --Tiernan On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Richard Elling <richard.ell...@gmail.com>wrote: > On Oct 7, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Johannes Totz <johan...@jo-t.de> wrote: > > > On 05/10/2012 15:01, Edward Ned Harvey > > (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) wrote: > >>> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > >>> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Tiernan OToole > >>> > >>> I am in the process of planning a system which will have 2 ZFS > >>> servers, one on site, one off site. The on site server will be > >>> used by workstations and servers in house, and most of that will > >>> stay in house. There will, however, be data i want backed up > >>> somewhere else, which is where the offsite server comes in... This > >>> server will be sitting in a Data Center and will have some storage > >>> available to it (the whole server currently has 2 3Tb drives, > >>> though they are not dedicated to the ZFS box, they are on VMware > >>> ESXi). There is then some storage (currently 100Gb, but more can > >>> be requested) of SFTP enabled backup which i plan to use for some > >>> snapshots, but more on that later. > >>> > >>> Anyway, i want to confirm my plan and make sure i am not missing > >>> anything here... > >>> > >>> * build server in house with storage, pools, etc... * have a > >>> server in data center with enough storage for its reason, plus the > >>> extra for offsite backup * have one pool set as my "offsite" > >>> pool... anything in here should be backed up off site also... * > >>> possibly have another set as "very offsite" which will also be > >>> pushed to the SFTP server, but not sure... * give these pools out > >>> via SMB/NFS/iSCSI * every 6 or so hours take a snapshot of the 2 > >>> offsite pools. * do a ZFS send to the data center box * nightly, > >>> on the very offsite pool, do a ZFS send to the SFTP server * if > >>> anything goes wrong (my server dies, DC server dies, etc), Panic, > >>> download, pray... the usual... :) > >>> > >>> Anyway, I want to make sure i am doing this correctly... Is there > >>> anything on that list that sounds stupid or am i doing anything > >>> wrong? am i missing anything? > >>> > >>> Also, as a follow up question, but slightly unrelated, when it > >>> comes to the ZFS Send, i could use SSH to do the send, directly to > >>> the machine... Or i could upload the compressed, and possibly > >>> encrypted dump to the server... Which, for resume-ability and > >>> speed, would be suggested? And if i where to go with an upload > >>> option, any suggestions on what i should use? > >> > >> It is recommended, whenever possible, you should pipe the "zfs send" > >> directly into a "zfs receive" on the receiving system. For two > >> solid reasons: > >> > >> If a single bit is corrupted, the whole stream checksum is wrong and > >> therefore the whole stream is rejected. So if this occurs, you want > >> to detect it (in the form of one incremental failed) and then > >> correct it (in the form of the next incremental succeeding). > >> Whereas, if you store your streams on storage, it will go undetected, > >> and everything after that point will be broken. > >> > >> If you need to do a restore, from a stream stored on storage, then > >> your only choice is to restore the whole stream. You cannot look > >> inside and just get one file. But if you had been doing send | > >> receive, then you obviously can look inside the receiving filesystem > >> and extract some individual specifics. > >> > >> If the recipient system doesn't support "zfs receive," [...] > > > > On that note, is there a minimal user-mode zfs thing that would allow > > receiving a stream into an image file? No need for file/directory access > > etc. > > cat :-) > > > I was thinking maybe the zfs-fuse-on-linux project may have suitable > bits? > > I'm sure most Linux distros have cat > -- richard > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
