3 ms·

>Linux will soon have btrfs, which is as good as (if not better than) ZFS. btrfs does not even try to solve the problem I want zfs for; snapshots over the netw

by lsc 14y ago

>Linux will soon have btrfs, which is as good as (if not better than) ZFS. btrfs does not even try to solve the problem I want zfs for; snapshots over the network. You see, when you deal with a large amount of storage (especially if you deal with that storage as block devices that run arbitrary filesystems, and not just files on a filesystem) the bottleneck for backups becomes disk bandwidth, not network bandwidth, so things like rsync don't help much. ZFS snapshots over the network? those help rather a lot. Unlike rsync and stuff, it saves me disk bandwidth, not just network bandwidth. Unlike inotify-based systems, I don't need to have knowledge of the filesystems I'm replicating. (I know I harp on this a lot... I just want to point out that btrfs, no matter how good it is for the problems it attempts to solve, isn't even trying to solve the problem I need ZFS for.)

gonzo 14y ago
At <company I work for, which owns pfSense> we use ZFS for exactly this. Functional, always 'on' backups to the hosting center next door (we have some nice single-mode fiber running to our cabinet there.)
rogerbinns 14y ago
> btrfs does not even try to solve the problem I want zfs for; snapshots over the network. This a recent Ubuntu system (ie not using development trees etc) $ btrfs send --help usage: btrfs send <command> <args> btrfs send [-v] [-i <subvol>] [-p <parent>] <subvol> Send the subvolume to stdout. $ btrfs receive --help usage: btrfs receive <command> <args> btrfs receive [-v] [-i <infile>] <mount> Receive subvolumes from stdin.
- lsc 14y ago
  Ooh. thanks. this post is probably the most useful bit of information I've read this month. Hm. I will have to research more, but this might... change things significantly. I mean, it's still a newish feature, not something you want for backups, but between that an bcache, Linux looks like it might deserve another look, storage-wise.

by lsc 14y ago

gonzo 14y ago

At <company I work for, which owns pfSense> we use ZFS for exactly this. Functional, always 'on' backups to the hosting center next door (we have some nice single-mode fiber running to our cabinet there.)

rogerbinns 14y ago

> btrfs does not even try to solve the problem I want zfs for; snapshots over the network. This a recent Ubuntu system (ie not using development trees etc) $ btrfs send --help usage: btrfs send <command> <args> btrfs send [-v] [-i <subvol>] [-p <parent>] <subvol> Send the subvolume to stdout. $ btrfs receive --help usage: btrfs receive <command> <args> btrfs receive [-v] [-i <infile>] <mount> Receive subvolumes from stdin.

lsc 14y ago
Ooh. thanks. this post is probably the most useful bit of information I've read this month. Hm. I will have to research more, but this might... change things significantly. I mean, it's still a newish feature, not something you want for backups, but between that an bcache, Linux looks like it might deserve another look, storage-wise.