xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfs_copy

To: Daniel Moore <dxm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfs_copy
From: ivanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 13:48:09 +1000
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200008140321.NAA08204@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Daniel Moore wrote:

> ivanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> 
>  => (Under IRIX) xfs_copy will copy unmounted xfs filesystems, whereas
>  => xfsdump/xfsrestore use mounted filesystems.  The only real difference
>  => between xfs_copy and dd, is that xfs_copy will generate a new filesystem
>  => uuid for the copied filesystems.
> 
> xfs_copy also traverses the AGF & it seems only copies the blocks that
> are actually in use by the filesystem (neat but that means we'd have
> to SIM -> libxfs it as well as porting it to linux).
> 
> I think the best option is to remove xfs_copy from the tree. Does
> anyone have any objections to me nuking it?
> 
> The already mentioned alternatives are dd and xfs_dump/restore.
> If uuids are the issue (and xfs_db doesn't already do what is
> needed), it would be really easy to write a tool to manipulate
> them as needed.

xfsdump has a problem if two filesystems have the same uuid, as it uses
the uuid to identify the filesystem in the inventory.  While this may not
be a common occurance, it still might be worth putting the uuid generator
on the todo list (in place of porting xfs_copy).

Ivan

-- 
Ivan Rayner
ivanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>