On 01/11/11 15:40, Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 11, 2011 15:33:38 Ivan LabÃth wrote:
>> On 01/11/11 15:19, Hubert Kario wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, January 11, 2011 14:54:38 Ivan LabÃth wrote:
>>>> On 01/10/11 14:36, Hubert Kario wrote:
>>>>> On Monday 10 of January 2011 14:25:32 Carl Cook wrote:
>>>>>> Here is my proposed cron:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> btrfs subvolume snapshot hex:///home
>>>>>> /media/backups/snapshots/hex-{DATE}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> rsync --archive --hard-links --delete-during --delete-excluded
>>>>>> --inplace --numeric-ids -e ssh
>>>>>> --exclude-from=/media/backups/exclude-hex hex:///home
>>>>>> /media/backups/hex
>>>>>>
>>>>>> btrfs subvolume snapshot droog:///home
>>>>>> /media/backups/snapshots/droog-{DATE}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> rsync --archive --hard-links --delete-during --delete-excluded
>>>>>> --inplace --numeric-ids -e ssh
>>>>>> --exclude-from=/media/backups/exclude-droog droog:///home
>>>>>> /media/backups/droog
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Comments? Criticisms?
>>>>>
>>>>> This will make the dates associated with snapshots offset by how often
>>>>> cron is run.
>>>>>
>>>>> In other words, if you run above script daily you will have data from
>>>>> 2011.01.01 in the hex-2011.01.02 directory.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do save the current date, do a LVM snapshot on the source, rsync
>>>>> --inplace data over and do a local snapshot naming the folder using the
>>>>> saved date. This way the date in the name of backup directory is exact
>>>>> to about a second.
>>>>
>>>> If you are mounting a LVM snapshot of an already mounted filesystem,
>>>> would you be willing verify that it is really a snapshot that is
>>>> mounted?
>>>>
>>>> e.g. touch /mnt/live/its_alive && ls /mnt/snapshot/
>>>>
>>>> I am nearly willing to bet it is not a snapshot.
>>>
>>> well, by "LVM snapshot on the source" I meant:
>>> 1. do lvcreate --snapshot
>>> 2. mount newly created volume
>>> 3. use the new directory as the base for rsync
>>> 4. arrange umount and destruction of the snapshot after rsync completes
>>> (no matter if it was successful)
>>>
>>> and this will in fact not make the "its_alive" visible in /mnt/snapshot
>>>
>>> You have to use this procedure if you use LVM snapshots for backup no
>>> matter to where do you copy data. That's why I shortened it to a single
>>> point -- it's not the part that is important from btrfs perspective.
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>
>> The point I was trying to make is: it does not work with btrfs.
>> Try the above with a btrfs and you will be surprised.
>> If the source volume uses another filesystem, it should work properly.
>>
>> regards,
>> ivan
>
> Yes, you are right, but I don't see a point in using LVM snapshots with btrfs,
> after all the ability to snapshot it on fs level is one of its defining
> features...
>
Yes, silently mounting another filesystem is the right thing to do.
When there already is a mounted filesystem probably containing nearly
identical data, the kernel should not bother allocating separate structures
for yet another copy of it. The user probably won't notice anyway.
--
ivan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
