Re: Significance of high number of mails on this list?

[Konstantinos Skarlatos <k.skarlatos@gmail.com>]

On 22/8/2014 6:40 πμ, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
> Hello people. Thank you for your detailed replies, esp Duncan.
>
> In essence, I plan on using BTRFS for my production data -- mainly
> programs/documents I write in connection with my academic research.
> I'm not a professional sysadmin and I'm not running a business server.
> I'm just managing my own data, and as I have mentioned, my chief
> reason for looking at BTRFS is the ease of snapshots and backups using
> send/receive.
>
> It is clear now that snapshots are by and large stable but
> send/receive is not. But, IIUC, even if send/receive fails I still
> have the older data which is not overwritten due to COW and atomic
> operations, and I can always retry send/receive again. Is this
> correct?
>
> If yes, then I guess I can take the plunge but ensure I have daily
> backups (which BTRFS itself should help me do easily).
>
>
I would stay with rsync for a while, because there is always the 
possibility of a bug that corrupts both your primary filesystem and your 
backup one, or send propagating corruption from one filesystem to 
another (Or maybe I am too paranoid, it would be good if we could have 
the opinion of a btrfs developer on this)

I would also suggest lsyncd if rsync runs become slow due to too many 
files and directories, or you have something like my use case, where i 
have filesystems with millions of files and my backup servers are a few 
km away and reachable over relatively slow wireless links.

Finaly, be sure to use the --inplace option of rsync.

-- 
Konstantinos Skarlatos