Can you make read-write snapshots? Dumping the quota state after the
snapshot make sure the quota info is frozen for the backup too. I will try
this with EVMS when I get the chance.
Regards,
Jeremy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pedot, Wolfgang" <wpedot@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 5:10 AM
Subject: AW: xfsdumping of LVM-Snapshots whith quotas
> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 04:32:37AM -0400, Pedot, Wolfgang wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I´m using xfs release 1.2 on LVM with a 2.4.19 SMP-Kernel
> > to manage filesystems
> > > on a raid5 (hardware).
> > > For backup I first create LVM snapshots of the filesystems
> > and then use xfsdump
> > > (amanda) on them.
> > >
> > > Since the snapshots are readonly xfsdump is unable to
> > handle quota-filesystems
> > > correctly by creating a
> > > file containing quota-information. The backup itself is
> > working but amanda
> > > always reports these incidents.
> > >
> > > Is there any way to tell xfsdump to ignore quotas so I can
> > run xfsdq before
> > > creating snapshots on the real fs to create the
> > > xfsdump_quota file and then run my backup?
> >
> > no i don't believe so.
> >
> > however as a sidenote i am wondering if it might be possible for
> > xfsdump to do quota backups in a more sensible way. would it be
> > possible for it to backup a file which doesn't exist? such that xfsdq
> > output would be read into memory and then fed into a file in the
> > archive?
> >
> > really the most clean way is probably extending the xfsdump fileformat
> > to have specific space for quota information, but that would lead to
> > various compatibility issues.
> >
> > ive just never cared for the method xfsdump uses to do quota backups,
> > its more of a hack, one which has some security implications (as i
> > recently pointed out, and which was mostly corrected).
>
>
> So the only way to get rid of this "error" is to forget about snapshooting
and
> instead dump the real filesystem?
> I dont like this, since I cant freeze it or at least remount as readonly
during
> backup because that would lead to
> the very same problem....
>
> I guess i will just have to live with that message and ignore it for
now...
>
> greetings
> Wolfgang
>
>
|