|
Re: Amanda and ZFS
2008-04-25 12:29:55
Anthony Worrall wrote:
Hi
unfortunately zfsdump, or "zfs send" as it is now, does not relate to
ufsdump in any way :-(
hmm. I guess I was being a bit naive.
I had assumed zfs development was more mature.
After reading the comments on this thread, I went searching for
references to zfsdump (which doesn't exist, but nevertheless is a good
search term for discussions of the missing capability). There are a
variety of discussions on Sun's web site and others regarding
difficulties with figuring out how to backup zfs, most particularly with
respect to disaster recovery, where file system structure and
information have been lost.
This gives me a bit more insight into comments from a Sun engineer we
met with a couple of weeks ago (ok, he was an engineer specializing in
Sun storage systems who works for the vendor who has the Sun contract
for our state). Anyway, when I asked him if ZFS was ready for prime
time, he hedged. I asked why people weren't adopting it more. He said
that it hadn't really panned out, and that UFS had developed more during
the time of ZFS development. So, most people were sticking with UFS. Of
particular note was that ZFS isn't really supported for your boot drive.
Based on our discussions with this engineer, the new servers and storage
systems we are getting will be set up entirely without ZFS.
However, given my earlier naive assumptions, I'm not going to assume
that this is the complete story. Just enough to get my skepticism and
sysadmin conservatism into full gear. ;-)
---------------
Chris Hoogendyk
-
O__ ---- Systems Administrator
c/ /'_ --- Biology Department
(*) \(*) -- 140 Morrill Science Center
~~~~~~~~~~ - University of Massachusetts, Amherst
<hoogendyk AT bio.umass DOT edu>
---------------
|
|
|
