From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF75715815E for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:20:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EBA4DE2A1D; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:19:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gw2.antarean.org (gw2.antarean.org [141.105.125.208]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 776F3E29D3 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:19:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw2.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TTpP94NQ8z8scJ for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:19:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from gw2.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gw2.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ezxLwZquseFd for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:19:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailstore1.adm.antarean.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw2.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TTpP91CdWz8sb4 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:19:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailstore1.adm.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TTpP90gsPz1M for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:19:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from mailstore1.adm.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailstore1.adm.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ujh42KhwdpLc for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:19:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from iris.localnet (iris.adm.antarean.org [10.55.16.47]) by mailstore1.adm.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4TTpNl1pkMz17 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:19:35 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=antarean.org; s=default; t=1707236375; bh=e3a8Gk3Uxufn9r4CsoMfkav6ebczH9F0sWCGlTExR5A=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=NTHgYrYeL1cA4cIwTrGRS7u7tvV4wHIs3KWFErbyTEQyowJ2CADfXd0XKHbPulUHG EQbdl0jhbQkHbRw2mD0kFmn55S9+MU0CNK3740VBV6vQ4/++z1ZomcEIdA1cRfR5zT 0euWWEewtqcOASHCCB8HN8s/qZ/KXkhZLQpzXaUg= From: "J. Roeleveld" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme? Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2024 17:19:35 +0100 Message-ID: <4553703.LvFx2qVVIh@iris> In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archives-Salt: ac6b5df9-68d6-4f7d-aa0f-33fa0ad755dc X-Archives-Hash: a46427b3431df836519ded8189f659ba On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 4:35:34 PM CET Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2024-02-05, Wols Lists wrote: > > On 04/02/2024 15:48, Grant Edwards wrote: > >> OK I see. That's a bit different than what I'm doing. I'm backing up > >> a specific set of directory trees from a couple different > >> filesystems. There are large portions of the "source" filesystems that > >> I have no need to back up. And within those directory trees that do > >> get backed up there are also some excluded subtrees. > > > > But my scheme still works here. The filesystem I'm snapshotting is the > > backup. As such, it only contains the stuff I want backed up, copied > > across using rsync. > > > > There's nothing stopping me running several rsyncs from the live system, > > from several different partitions, to the backup partition. > > Ah! Got it. That's one of the things I've been trying to figure out > this entire thread, do I need to switch home and root to ZFS to take > advantage of its snapshot support for backups? In the case you're > describing the "source" filesystem(s) can be anything. It's only the > _backup_ filesystem that needs to be ZFS (or similar). If you want to use snapshots, the filesystem will need to support it. (either LVM or ZFS). If you only want to create snapshots on the backupserver, I actually don't see much benefit over using rsync. > If (like rsnapshot/rsync's hard-link scheme) ZFS snapshots are normal > directory trees that can be "browsed" with normal filesystem tools, > that would be ideal. [I'll do some googling...] ZFS snapshots can be accessed using normal tools and can even be exposed over NFS mounts making it super easy to find the files again. They are normally not visible though, you need to access them specifically using "/filesystem/path/.zfs/snapshot" -- Joost