Timeline for Periodic filesystem replication wih snapshot
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 18, 2017 at 8:33 | comment | added | Nikos Alexandris | Thanks for mentioning the ZFS related CPU soft lockup. This wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/ZFS#ARC is related I think. | |
| Oct 22, 2013 at 5:31 | answer | added | poige | timeline score: 2 | |
| Sep 19, 2013 at 3:15 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackUnix/status/380530659644956672 | ||
| Sep 17, 2013 at 5:59 | comment | added | strugee | friendly reminder that you can convert ext4 in-place to btrfs and roll it back later if you don't like it | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 5:54 | comment | added | pepoluan | anchor.com.au/blog/2013/04/the-btrfs-backup-experiment suggested to experiment with btrfs as the backup filesystem (which, in my situation, would be the Slave server), and wait until it's more stable. So, that still leaves me the problem of what I should deploy on the Master server :-/ | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 5:51 | history | edited | pepoluan | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 421 characters in body |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 5:51 | comment | added | strugee | true, although apparently the btrfs guys think it's fairly stable. at least, the disk format is. btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 5:49 | comment | added | pepoluan | @strugee I'm even more hesitant to use btrfs ... no one ever claimed it's ready for production-servers use, while ZFS has had time to mature (in the Solaris universe), and several people has claimed it's ready for production (although there are edge cases like mine). | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 5:39 | comment | added | strugee | maybe look into btrfs? | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 5:08 | history | asked | pepoluan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |