When and why to deprecate filesystems
When and why to deprecate filesystems
Posted Mar 8, 2022 16:54 UTC (Tue) by Wol (subscriber, #4433)In reply to: When and why to deprecate filesystems by nix
Parent article: When and why to deprecate filesystems
As for historical, that's why I use lvm. Take a snapshot, do the inplace rsync, and I get a full backup for the price of an incremental.
I don't plan to clean out my incrementals, unless I'm running short of disk space.
Cheers,
Wol
Posted Mar 8, 2022 17:11 UTC (Tue)
by rgmoore (✭ supporter ✭, #75)
[Link] (2 responses)
If you're limiting yourself to critical files- or if you're willing to spend more- you could back up to the cloud. It's definitely offsite, and it has its own layers of protection. If you're serious, you'd want some solution that would let you encrypt your files locally, so anyone who gets a copy of your cloud files won't be able to read all your secrets. Of course you probably want that for any off-site backup.
Posted Mar 8, 2022 17:21 UTC (Tue)
by geert (subscriber, #98403)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Mar 8, 2022 17:36 UTC (Tue)
by rgmoore (✭ supporter ✭, #75)
[Link]
I keep an off-site backup in a locked desk drawer at work, but I still keep that encrypted. Transparent encryption is easy enough that it's silly not to use it on any USB hard drive whose contents you care at all about keeping secret.
Posted Mar 8, 2022 18:16 UTC (Tue)
by smurf (subscriber, #17840)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Mar 8, 2022 23:10 UTC (Tue)
by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
[Link] (3 responses)
How does btrfs snapshot magic everything onto a different hard drive?
And to the best of my knowledge, btrfs raid-5 is still in experimental eat-your-data status ...
I use lvm on my live raid-5 array to take live snapshots, and lvm/rsync on my backup drive to take full/incremental backups.
Cheers,
Posted Mar 9, 2022 6:08 UTC (Wed)
by calumapplepie (guest, #143655)
[Link]
Posted Mar 10, 2022 2:31 UTC (Thu)
by bartoc (guest, #124262)
[Link] (1 responses)
Tbh ZFS' raid5 also leaves something to be desired since it avoids the write hole by doing things that can have pretty bad performance consequences down the line (esp with how unwilling ZFS is to muck around with stuff on disk, in general). I'm hoping bcachefs' approach pays off (it does raid5 by initially writing the data in raid10 (or at least mirrored), committing that, then later rewriting that mirror to raid5 and atomically updating the filesystem metadata once it's done.
Posted Mar 14, 2022 15:10 UTC (Mon)
by hkario (subscriber, #94864)
[Link]
also, HDDs lying about bad sectors is not only a RAID-5 issue, it's just as likely to impact RAID-1 setups
Posted Mar 9, 2022 21:27 UTC (Wed)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
You give a drive to a friend you see sometimes and swap it. (I do this with several friends and relatives living at different distances from me.)
You really don't want to use lvm snapshots to do long-term historical backups: IIRC, writes slow down proportional to the number of snapshots in place. For comparison and to see what you can do with an actual automated backup system, I have 9103 backup snapshots currently accessible in my onsite backup (mostly once-every-three-hourly backups of /home). Most of the backups took under a minute to run (and, obviously, happened with no human intervention at all). LVM would grind completely to a halt long before you reached *that* sort of scale.
> I don't plan to clean out my incrementals, unless I'm running short of disk space.
Quite so -- and since bup uses rsync-style deduplication and also compresses the backups, that's going to be a long time.
When and why to deprecate filesystems
Offsite? Where? :-) For a home system that could be a problem (unless I put a bare drive in the garage...)
When and why to deprecate filesystems
When and why to deprecate filesystems
When and why to deprecate filesystems
When and why to deprecate filesystems
Wol
When and why to deprecate filesystems
When and why to deprecate filesystems
When and why to deprecate filesystems
When and why to deprecate filesystems