From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EEE6138996 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 17:37:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A162E0881; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 17:37:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qg0-f53.google.com (mail-qg0-f53.google.com [209.85.192.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1EB1E0A84 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 17:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id z107so2498847qgd.12 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 10:37:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=D0f5BzBMNBTugHsrqaOU1XqPjpiOZkVBB5b9AEkTBBU=; b=FNW6kxuCNwi4NB2bU0XVExzM9lEfs4za6z7gjTm8rVtwxeYupWpZarO8OfM6lYL/KF PsvRCicped0OhWf39Bf0sDhr3N9s1u7TReJiMM6n4XyjXIJNAFhBz00ue48R2+Jl5s3q FH0uYBzCH8JX3NgFVd2OJe95amNXRfvAjvQeyEEYCBF/kDiGQsWcCoXMoJatvsJNUCR8 rbr0Qral1fTDxJkN96hSlUUbF1swDQ3XRCCRApC3kSYBuu9N6+XCrsXTNLjMe4D40nuY wJkRlAv81IaBSKxzsLHVL4bH9Dvrn5W937nVSpx0ZISCBhSx8mw3UmWsvvBJ8geQxGeC SCGQ== 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 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.39.11 with SMTP id u11mr33418742qgu.32.1414431444984; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 10:37:24 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.102.134 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 10:37:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <544E7F83.4020303@googlemail.com> References: <201410270924.40381.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <544E2875.5000309@gmail.com> <201410271522.32452.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <544E7F83.4020303@googlemail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 13:37:24 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: kCI4_RTvUVn9s0DazkpfgCNhUMs Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Safeguarding strategies against SSD data loss From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: b9615693-f15b-409c-9318-a06937735dfc X-Archives-Hash: be021c308c411304284dd02b6c6e49e2 On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > Am 27.10.2014 um 16:36 schrieb Rich Freeman: >> and a boot >> partition as I don't think grub supports it - it could be a bit of a >> PITA for a single-drive system. > > nope. But I don't see any reason to use zfs with a single drive either. True, not needing to use FUSE does simplify things, but I don't believe that grub supports zfs, so you would need a boot partition. Granted, a newer laptop would need that for EFI anyway. > >> However, it is probably more mature >> than btrfs overall, and it certainly supports send. > > and if your send stream is corrupted, your data is gone. That is why I > prefer cp&tar to backup my zfs data tank. > If you ONLY save the send stream without checking it, then you're right that you're depending on its integrity. I'd certainly be nervous about doing that with btrfs, probably less so with zfs but I can't really vouch for it. I don't know what ability either filesystem gives you to verify a send stream in isolation. Now, what you could do is receive the send stream into a replica filesystem on the far end, and not consider the backup successful until this is done. That would look like a btrfs-to-btrfs rsync operation, but it would be much more efficient in terms of IO. It would require a daemon on the far end to run the receive operation and report back status, vs just dumping the files via scp, etc. Does anybody know if either btrfs or zfs send includes checksums? I know the data is checksummed on disk, but I have no idea if it is protected in this way while serialized. -- Rich