[Dirvish] Hauntingly similar to Dirvish
danielp at audioprecision.com
Tue Nov 13 17:20:27 UTC 2007
The other disadvantage is that iSCSI or FC SAN is slower and costs much more
$$ per GB than unmanaged SCSI storage.
From: dirvish-bounces at dirvish.org [mailto:dirvish-bounces at dirvish.org] On
Behalf Of Paul Slootman
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 2:42 AM
To: dirvish at dirvish.org
Subject: Re: [Dirvish] Hauntingly similar to Dirvish
On Sat 10 Nov 2007, Petcher, Daniel wrote:
> Is it just my mis-perception, or is this new Apple Time Machine
> (http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/timemachine.html) backup I hear
> described in their new "Leopard" OS (not to mention the
> barely-developed Linux clone called Flyback -
> http://code.google.com/p/flyback/) eerily familiar?
> Sure, they've got a pretty Apple-style GUI, some logic added to skip
> cache files, pre-configure the expiration process. and resume after a
> shut-down, but it's essentially the same idea we've been using for years.
Well, NetApp Filer-style snapshots are also eerily similar to dirvish
images. I'm sure NetApp did their thing before dirvish.
The Netapp snapshots are cooler because (a) they're pretty much
instantaneous to make, and (b) only the changed data blocks take up space,
instead of only the changed files. Of course that's because it's implemented
in the filesystem.
Disadvantage is of course that it's not a remote backup, although it's
trivial to copy out a snapshot.
Dirvish mailing list
Dirvish at dirvish.org
More information about the Dirvish