>>>>> On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 04:09:05 -0500, Phil Howard <phil-amanda-users AT ipal 
>>>>> DOT net> said:

    Phil> If tar can read from raw tape, it can read from raw disk.  I've
    Phil> already done that several times for various things.  Bare metal
    Phil> recovery will need at a minimum the tar or dump utility
    Phil> depending on format used.

I've thought about this raw partition stuff and I'm a bit afraid like some
others on the list.

First I would say it is possible to mkfs the disk before each new usage to
have clean data structures with less overhead (no fragmentation...).

Secondly you could choose a file system optimized for big files and
write-ahead only. It s possible to change the parameters of the FS to push
even more this behaviour (how many cylinders? block size? no logging on
the data, no block reserve for fast allocation...).

Third, what about bad blocks on disk? How to skip them in a raw partition
if you do not have state-of-the-art disks that do block remapping for you
in your back-yard (such as SCSI)? Often FS do these tricks for you on
IDE disks for example.

Well, IMHO, I would vote for a FS solution except if I have a real
gain... :-)

-- 
  Ronan KERYELL               |\/  Tel:    (+33|0) 2.29.00.14.15
  Département Informatique    |/)  Fax:    (+33|0) 2.29.00.12.82
  ENST Bretagne, CS 83818     K    GSM:    (+33|0) 6.13.14.37.66
  F-29238 PLOUZANÉ CEDEX      |\   E-mail: rk AT enstb DOT org
  FRANCE                      | \  http://enstb.org/~keryell
                                   callto:ils.seconix.com/rk AT enstb DOT org