SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

July 2014

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Vladimir Mosgalin <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Vladimir Mosgalin <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 29 Jul 2014 13:32:44 +0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (41 lines)
Hi ToddAndMargo!

 On 2014.07.28 at 10:38:36 -0700, ToddAndMargo wrote next:

> Hi Vladimir,
> 
>   Is xfsdump any better?

Not exactly, it's the same as regular dump, just "for xfs".
Same things apply. From man page:
       xfsdump requires root privilege (except for inventory display).

       xfsdump can only dump XFS filesystems.

       The  media format used by xfsdump can only be
       understood by xfsrestore.

> 
>   What do you prefer in its place?
> 

Just use tar or dar (http://dar.linux.free.fr/) for simple backups..
Later is my personal favourite.

(other backup software usually takes some time to configure, and cpio is
a bad choice for a number of reasons)

>   It looks like a full wipe to go to 7 and xfs anyway.

No one forces you to use xfs. Actually, I (and some other people I know)
are sure to continue using proven & reliable ext4 for root filesystem.
xfs is a good option for big storage, but I see no real benefits of
using it for OS storage. And since some things are a bit more
complicated in xfs than in ext4, there really is no point to use it
unless you are interested in some xfs-specific benefits. Xfs offers no
performance nor features compared to ext4 for small filesystems.

-- 

Vladimir

ATOM RSS1 RSS2