[ale] Centos

[Michael Trausch]

Well that's be because filesystem snapshots are not backups. They FACILITATE them by reducing downtime, though.

I get so sick of apps having 1 to 12 hour backup windows. It isn't necessary. It hasn't been for years. Shut down app, make snapshot, start app, run backup from snapshot, optionally keep snapshot around for expediency but never rely on it. Application downtime is then five minutes or less. Usually less than one minute. Nearly nobody even notices.

I do backups of my critical things, such as local only data and anything that takes more than about 8 hours to mirror from the net. That is nearly 1 TB of data. My total storage not counting offlines and backups is nearing 3 TB.

I don't have tapes for backup though. I use one and two layer BD. Easier, faster, random-access, and cheaper to ship and store, also cheaper to replace failed drives. 

Sent from my iPad

> On Jul 25, 2014, at 3:33 PM, Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> If I had the RAM horsepower to run dedupe portion of ZFS it would be very
> useful. But I really don't understand the fascination with doing filesystem
> snapshots. My old-geezer factor is gimme a damn tape backup system. I want
> important stuff in at least 2 different locations. Filesystem snapshots
> tend to get stored on the same hard drives the real filesystem is on so
> that's useless from my perspective.