[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: reiser4 plugins
Hash: SHA1

Jesper Krogh wrote:
> ["Followup-To:" header set to gmane.linux.kernel.]
> I gmane.linux.kernel, skrev David Masover:
>>>Most desktop users today don't have backups because there is no credible
>>>backup technology for 500Gb of data. They may have partial backups. Some
>> Bandwidth is getting faster. And I just found a nice site for backups
>> called They don't seem to support rsync, and allow only
>> 100 meg downloads, but unlimited uploads.
>> Few desktop users today really need to backup more than 50 megs of data.
> That gives tedious manual work.. and btw, won't save you if you from
> loosing stuff from when the backup was made until now.


Try scripting. For me, that's a tar command involving /home, /etc, and
about one or two other files, with a few excludes, like /home/shared/video.

>>>things the fs can't deal with - if the disk goes boom then thats a lower
>>>level concern. Also certain bits like writing to spare blocks on a
>>>problem write are indeed handled drive level nowdays.
>> Right. And putting them in the FS is unneccesary bloat if you've got
>> another mechanism for dealing with it. Anyone with 500 gigs of data can
>> afford to do a little RAID, or at least some burned DVDs.
>> DVDs are cheap nowdays:
> Again lots of manual work.. I actually have a DAT-station.. but I'm not
> getting it used. People have DVD-burners, but many don't get time to do
> a backup anyway. A Copy-On-Write feature in the filesystem would save
> the average dataloss situation todag (for home users). Where they
> accidentally deletes stuff.

A lot of the people I know keep stuff on their DVDs, like movies and
music, so they can carry them around. And the rest of it is the 50 megs.

>> Streamload.
> Why, when it could be quick and transparent. And Linux is used many
> places where you cant let data out-of-the-house of where bandwidth
> "sucks". The waste-space in my diskdrives increases everyday .. and i
> fill up with a tar-ball of the system every now-and-then, but it would
> definately be better suited and more effecient (save me more times) done
> directly in the filesystem.

Streamload is quick and transparent for me. I put files on the
fileserver, it tars them up and uploads them via Streamload's perl client.

>> I agree it's nice to have a more corruption-proof filesystem.
>> Convenient. But not absolutely necessary.
> Thats called raid, we have that allready. But raid won't help for and:
> rm /etc/passwd, a Copy-On-Write filesystem (not-snapshot) would. Used on
> a mirrored raiddisk, with enough space on the disk, it would actually
> guard you from allmost anything but getting the computer stolen.
> Totally unrelated to reiser4 but a feature that would be nice to have in
> "any" filesystem.

Not totally unrelated. COW has been discussed. I don't remember if the
low-level stuff was done, but the main complaint was a lack of a copy
system call.

And RAID is an argument for Reiser4's attitude that it's not the job of
the FS to be corruption-proof.

Still, it's far easier to avoid deleting stuff than to avoid disk
failure. First priority is to get the stuff OFF the machine.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-06-25 09:51    [W:0.362 / U:3.316 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site