| 1 |
David <dcorraly@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tuesday 06 May 2008 23:54:08 Andrew MacKenzie wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
>> If you're using 'dd' does that mean you're copying the entire filesystem |
| 5 |
>> and not just the files? I believe that can run you into some issues if |
| 6 |
>> the FS isn't read-only... |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> What kind of issues? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
If the fs is mounted read/write, it can very easily happen, that the |
| 11 |
filesystem isn't "consistent"; ie. you start to read from the source |
| 12 |
and when you get to the end, stuff has changed. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
If you really must use dd (why?), I would *VERY* much urge to use LVM |
| 15 |
snapshots. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
But in reality, I'd rather use rsync to keep the two discs in sync. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> The idea is to copy the whole filesystem to another |
| 20 |
> disk and keep it sync. And in case of "crisis" use dd from the backup to |
| 21 |
> the original disk. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
And why dd? What do you think you gain by using dd, compared to the |
| 24 |
more traditional way of copying just all the files (be it with tar, |
| 25 |
be it with rsync or even with plain cp)? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Michael |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives