From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:59:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.interline.it (mail.interline.it [195.182.241.4]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id k7H6wnDW007897 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:58:50 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.interline.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACC618D8 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 08:52:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.interline.it ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pin [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 22051-23 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 08:52:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.98] (unknown [88.36.237.170]) by mail.interline.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF8408C9 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 08:52:02 +0200 (CEST) From: "Daniele P." Subject: Re: xfsdump -s unacceptable performances Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 08:58:11 +0200 References: <200608161515.00543.daniele@interline.it> <200608162001.10342.daniele@interline.it> <44E3C6D5.2080704@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <44E3C6D5.2080704@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200608170858.11697.daniele@interline.it> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thursday 17 August 2006 03:31, you wrote: > Daniele P. wrote: > > But xfsdump still doesn't scale down well with a small subtree on a > > large filesystem. > > That is very true. > It is really designed for dumping whole filesystems (or at least, > large parts of them). > For dumping small subtrees, I'd be looking at using something else. Hi Timothy, Yes, you are right, but there is another problem on my side. The /small/ subtree of the filesystem usually contains a lot of hard links (our backup software uses hard links to save disk space, so expect one hard link per file per day) and using a generic tool like tar/star or rsync that uses "stat" to scan the filesysem should be significant slower (no test done) than a native tool like xfsdump, as Bill in a previous email pointed out. It seems that there isn't a right tool for this job. Regards, Daniele