|
Re: [Networker] What order are files recovered?
2006-02-24 16:25:57
George Sinclair wrote:
Kind of a dumb question here ...
I ran a saveset recover recently and noticed that it doesn't seem to
recover the files in any specific order. The order that the files get
recovered doesn't match an 'ls' on the same pathname. For example, 'ls'
shows: file201.txt, file202.txt ... file209.txt and then file210.txt
..., but the recovery doesn't recover file210.txt immediately after
file209.txt. Instead, file210.txt gets recovered maybe 100 files later.
For the most part, the recovery order does agree with 'ls', but there's
a lot of gaps, but in the end, everything is recovered.
The path was saved from the client using 'save -b pool -l full
/pathname'. The pool does not allow browsing.
Is it safe to assume that the data was recovered based on how it was
saved, and the data is saved based on how it's written to actual disk
(block level?). Obviously, 'ls' displays things in alphabetical order,
but does NetWorker back up files in any specific order?
Yes, the data is recovered in the order it is saved... :)
ls sorts by filename by default. At least on Linux, "ls -f" will show
you the "unsorted" order, which is the order they appear in the
directory data, which will appear fairly random in most cases, unless
the directory was created and then the files written in a specific
order, and it never changed.
I can't remember offhand whether networker uses directory order (the
"unsorted" list), or inode order like with the old BSD dump/restore
system. In either case, over the long run it is a fairly random order.
-Brian
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and type
"signoff networker" in the
body of the email. Please write to networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu
if you have any problems
wit this list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
|
|
|
