From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Subject: Re: tar / backup solutions Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 20:25:42 +0100 Sender: linux-admin-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20020429192542.GV23141@piku.org.uk> References: <20020429182003.40701.qmail@web12804.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020429182003.40701.qmail@web12804.mail.yahoo.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "'linux-admin@vger.kernel.org'" On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 11:20:03AM -0700, Christopher Slater wrote: | I thought that gtar allowed bigger than 2G tarballs. It could be a | filesystem problem. I think the default in some Unixes is for | "nolargefiles". That is, no files larger than 2G. You might check | that you're not running into that. ext2 did have a 2GB limit. I think it's gone away now. I run ReiserFS and I believe that can cope with big files. | One other option would be to break your backup into 2G chunks. Say, | backup /home into /backup/fullbackup_home.tar.gz, etc... This would be a safer idea anyway. Should your large multi-gig tarfile get corrupt, you're stuffed. But if only your home.tar file got corrupt, you've not lost your entire backup. There's now the question of whether you should back up to your harddrive... Expend some cash on a DAT drive, it's worth it. It's no good having backups on disk if your harddrive dies. -- I am not my long-lost twin 6AD6 865A BF6E 76BB 1FC2 | www.piku.org.uk/public-key.asc E4C4 DEEA 7D08 D511 E149 | www.piku.org.uk wnzrf@cvxh.bet.hx (rot13'd)