[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Interrupted xfsdump Resume Behaviour for Regular Dump File

To: Gim Leong Chin <chingimleong@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Interrupted xfsdump Resume Behaviour for Regular Dump File
From: Bill Kendall <wkendall@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 08:30:54 -0600
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1321794858.60631.YahooMailClassic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1321794858.60631.YahooMailClassic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20080502)
If you look at the inventory after an interrupted backup, it
will indicate the stream (and media file) start and end points.
If the end point is "ino 0 offset 0", then a resumed restore
will end up backing up everything again.

If you can, please try this with the top-of-tree code from
the git tree on kernel.org. I did a quick test and it seems
to be working there.

Note that if you're backing up to stdout, xfsdump cannot
determine when the output is safely on media, so a resumed
backup will always be a full backup.


Gim Leong Chin wrote:

I have observed this since some time back.  I have just done an experiment.

1) Using xfsdump 3.0.6, I first did a full dump to regular file and restore, 
checked that every thing is correct.

2) I then did the same dump again, but interrupted it.  Then I resumed the 
dump.  I noted that the resumed dump file is the exact same size as the full 
dump file.

3) First I did a cumulative restore, with the interrupted dump file, followed 
by the resumed dump file.  I checked that the restore is correct.

4) I then did a non-cumulative restore, using only resumed dump file.  The 
resume is successful, and I checked that the restore is correct.

The logs are attached.

The conclusion is that the so-called resume of an interrupted dump session to 
regular file produces a full dump file, that is sufficient by itself to do the 
full restore.

Are my observations of the behaviour of xfsdump correct?

Everything was done on openSUSE 11.4 x86_64.



xfs mailing list

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