Sponsored Content
Top Forums UNIX for Beginners Questions & Answers Should I use a CoW filesystem on my PC if I only wanted snapshot capabilities ? Post 303044632 by Neo on Friday 28th of February 2020 09:22:40 AM
Old 02-28-2020
No.

I do not recommend those file systems.

Your are better off running ext4, a RAID configuration (I run RAID1, but do not depend on it), and doing regular backups on your data based on your risk management model (this is the most critical).

Nothing beats a strong filesystem and a very well thought out backup and recovery plan.

That is my view. YMMV

On the desktop, I run macOS and have a similar strategy. I make full backups often, based on the activity on the system. The more activity and files (and the nature of the files) created, the more frequent the backups.
 

9 More Discussions You Might Find Interesting

1. UNIX for Dummies Questions & Answers

Unix Capabilities?

We are looking into buying a new software, billing software that is, and want to know if you can run that on the same UNIX server as another major software? Is there a limit to the different types of software Unix can run, or is it like windows where you can install as many as you like? ... (2 Replies)
Discussion started by: hoz
2 Replies

2. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

p570 Capabilities

Hi there. I've been tasked with making a new design for our Unix systems :eek: Now the question I have is; How many LPARs can a p570 hold WITHOUT using a VIO Server. Many Thanks Kees (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: KeesH
1 Replies

3. Red Hat

Adding capabilities to an RPM

Hi. I downloaded a package that could only be installed on RHEL5, and not 4 or 3, so I got the source in order to compile it on RHEL 3 so hopefully it will work on all versions. So I have the source for a working package, but when I build it in RHEL 3 and then try to install it in RHEL 5, it... (6 Replies)
Discussion started by: Boaz
6 Replies

4. Filesystems, Disks and Memory

Wanted: Geographically distributed filesystem solution

I'm looking for a means to ensure that servers in the two or three datacenters, connected in a ring via IP through two ISPs, can distribute load and/or replicate data among at least two SAN-class disk devices. I want to evaluate several solutions, and I'm open to solutions ranging from free,... (6 Replies)
Discussion started by: otheus
6 Replies

5. Solaris

Cannot use filesystem while sending a snapshot

I've got a Solaris 11 Express installed on my machine. I have created a raidz2 zpool named shares and a simple one-disc zpool named backup. I have made a script that would send a daily snapshot of shares to backup. I use these commands zfs snapshot shares@DDMMRRRRHHMM zfs send -i shares@....... (10 Replies)
Discussion started by: RychnD
10 Replies

6. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

Use of Capabilities

I wonder if anyone could assist with some problems I'm having with Linux Capabilities and their use when using the commands "nice" and "schedtool". I run a couple of PCs, one is an elderly AMD Sempron 2800+ (32-bit, 2GHz clock and 3GB memory) that is used as a family multimedia system running... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: MikeGM
3 Replies

7. Linux

Broadcom under Fedora 18 (Spherical Cow)

So I'm having a problem getting a Broadcom BCM4312 wireless controller to work under the broadcom-wl module $uname Linux 3.8.11-200.fc18.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed May 1 19:44:27 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux lspci -v 05:00.0 Network controller: Broadcom Corporation BCM4312 802.11b/g... (2 Replies)
Discussion started by: Skrynesaver
2 Replies

8. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

Linux capabilities discussion

Hi I'm trying to compile my linux kernel with CONFIG_SECURITY_CAPABILITIES=y. any idea what this thing does ?? Also another question , If I compile the kernel that I'm currently using , what'll happen ? ~cheers (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: leghorn
3 Replies

9. What is on Your Mind?

Anybody want to talk about Dirty Cow?

Hi All, How worried is everyone about the Dirty Cow Linux exploit? Has anybody experienced attacks yet? From the research I've done it seems that the exploit is "reliable" (that is it works nearly every time on vulverable systems) which is not good news. We all believe that Unix/Linux... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: hicksd8
3 Replies
bup-fsck(1)						      General Commands Manual						       bup-fsck(1)

NAME
bup-fsck - verify or repair a bup repository SYNOPSIS
bup fsck [-r] [-g] [-v] [--quick] [-j jobs] [--par2-ok] [--disable-par2] [filenames...] DESCRIPTION
bup fsck is a tool for validating bup repositories in the same way that git fsck validates git repositories. It can also generate and/or use "recovery blocks" using the par2(1) tool (if you have it installed). This allows you to recover from dam- aged blocks covering up to 5% of your .pack files. In a normal backup system, damaged blocks are less important, because there tends to be enough data duplicated between backup sets that a single damaged backup set is non-critical. In a deduplicating backup system like bup, however, no block is ever stored more than once, even if it is used in every single backup. If that block were to be unrecoverable, all your backup sets would be damaged at once. Thus, it's important to be able to verify the integrity of your backups and recover from disk errors if they occur. WARNING: bup fsck's recovery features are not available unless you have the free par2(1) package installed on your bup server. WARNING: bup fsck obviously cannot recover from a complete disk failure. If your backups are important, you need to carefully consider redundancy (such as using RAID for multi-disk redundancy, or making off-site backups for site redundancy). OPTIONS
-r, --repair attempt to repair any damaged packs using existing recovery blocks. (Requires par2(1).) -g, --generate generate recovery blocks for any packs that don't already have them. (Requires par2(1).) -v, --verbose increase verbosity (can be used more than once). --quick don't run a full git verify-pack on each pack file; instead just check the final checksum. This can cause a significant speedup with no obvious decrease in reliability. However, you may want to avoid this option if you're paranoid. Has no effect on packs that already have recovery information. -j, --jobs=numjobs maximum number of pack verifications to run at a time. The optimal value for this option depends how fast your CPU can verify packs vs. your disk throughput. If you run too many jobs at once, your disk will get saturated by seeking back and forth between files and performance will actually decrease, even if numjobs is less than the number of CPU cores on your system. You can experiment with this option to find the optimal value. --par2-ok immediately return 0 if par2(1) is installed and working, or 1 otherwise. Do not actually check anything. --disable-par2 pretend that par2(1) is not installed, and ignore all recovery blocks. EXAMPLE
# generate recovery blocks for all packs that don't # have them bup fsck -g # generate recovery blocks for a particular pack bup fsck -g ~/.bup/objects/pack/153a1420cb1c8*.pack # check all packs for correctness (can be very slow!) bup fsck # check all packs for correctness and recover any # damaged ones bup fsck -r # check a particular pack for correctness and recover # it if damaged bup fsck -r ~/.bup/objects/pack/153a1420cb1c8*.pack # check if recovery blocks are available on this system if bup fsck --par2-ok; then echo "par2 is ok" fi SEE ALSO
bup-damage(1), fsck(1), git-fsck(1) BUP
Part of the bup(1) suite. AUTHORS
Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com>. Bup unknown- bup-fsck(1)
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:29 PM.
Unix & Linux Forums Content Copyright 1993-2022. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy