Re: (mirroring &) ZFS: 9=no-ZFS; 10=yes?; 11=open=ZFS (improved)?

Matt McLeod <matt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In <6401302.iMkJUoPHNa@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Michael Schmarck wrote:
With UFS, how would you do the backup? Would you store the huge
file that ufsdump creates on tape? How would you do single file
restores in that case?

With 'ufsrestore -i', tagging the files or directories you need.
Only what is tagged is restored. ufsrestore still has to read through
a lot of tape to get what you want, but you don't need enough spare
disk to do a complete restore the way you do with zfs send/receive.

Ah. I guess that's the missing piece of information - "you" make
ufsrestore (and presumably also ufsdump) directly access the tape.
How does that cope with robots and backup software like NetBackup?

If you're using ufsdump/ufsrestore for backups then in that respect
ZFS is going to be a problem. If you're using "enterprise" tools
like Networker, NetBackup, TSM, whatever, then it isn't an issue.

I assumed that to be the case (ie. that "enterprise" tools are used).

We're using NetBackup (glorified GNU tar wrapper that it is) and it's
fine with ZFS. Previous gig used TSM, same deal. I used to be very
keen on ufsdump as a backup tool, not so much any more, not unless it's
been wrapped up in something like Amanda to do indexing and tape
management.

I actually never used ufsdump, as I always used "proper" tools,
be it NBU or HP DPM. With those tools, you backup files and have
(more or less) nice access to the files that are on tape. But as
a requirement for this, you first need to backup files. I don't
see how stuff like ufsdump would work with this (sure, you could
write the ufsdump to tape; either directly or you'd write the
ufsdump to disk and then put that on tape). But why would anyone
want to do this, seeing that you'd lose all the "comfort" tools
like NBU/DPM/TSM offer?

Michael
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Use of volume numbers in ufsrestore
    ... > I recently needed to do a complete restore, ... a single ufsdump spread over more than one tape. ... The workaround was to 'ufsrestore r' instead of 'ufsrestore x'. ...
    (comp.unix.solaris)
  • SUMMARY: How to speed up LTO3 transfer ?
    ... after a few tests done with Casper Dik it turned out that ufsdump is the limiting factor; ... changing 'blocking factor' of ufsdump doesn't help ... DUMP: 91.76% done, finished in 0:35 ... ing factor available with most tape drives is 126. ...
    (SunManagers)
  • Re: Anyone used Solaris Secure Shell, Suns productized ssh for Solaris9?
    ... for ufsdump it does nothing. ... As thiswears out the tapes it even makes your backups ... Only if your tape medium is faster than your local CPU's ability to process ... > Create sub nets that are more secure and others that are less secure. ...
    (comp.security.ssh)
  • Re: ufsdump very slow
    ... I have noticed for some time(after changing tape device) that the new ... ufsdump and that the disk that is beeing dumped is fully loadedbut ... Bottleneck here is how you are using ufsdump. ... drives are fast. ...
    (comp.unix.solaris)
  • ufsdump doesnt unload tape
    ... Some extra details: Scsi is via a SunSwift card, then a Dec SCSI SE to ... When I run ufsdump with the 'l' option (that's a small L, ... next tape, to continue the dump. ...
    (SunManagers)