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 B8F7215815E for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 17:29:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 291C2E2A1C; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 17:29:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.io (ciao.gmane.io [116.202.254.214]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C66CDE29FD for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 17:29:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rXPG2-0002Qp-1L for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 18:29:18 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Grant Edwards Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme? Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 17:29:09 -0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <4553703.LvFx2qVVIh@iris> User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux) 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 X-Archives-Salt: b9eec3c7-781e-45a8-b74a-16bcab5817fd X-Archives-Hash: d17ae18ae2724f31f1df44765a112355 On 2024-02-06, J. Roeleveld wrote: > 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. Upthread I've been told that ZFS snapshots 1. Require far less disk space than rsync's snapshots. 2. Are far faster. 3. Are atomic. >> 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" Great, that's exactly what I would hope for. I'm reading up on ZFS, and from what I've gleaned so far, it seems lake ZFS source and ZFS backup certainly would be ideal. It's almost like the ZFS filesystem designers had thought about "how to backup" from the start. Something that all of the old-school filesystem designers clearly hadn't. :)