On 21Sep2008 22:27, Theodore Tso <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: | On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 08:44:57PM -0400, Richard Michael wrote: | > (I run rsync --link-dest backups onto ext3 and am anticipating running | > out of inodes.) [...] Hmm. While I take the point that each link tree consumes inodes for the directories, in a tree that changes little the use of new inodes for new/changed files should be quite slow. [...snip e2fsck memory requirements...] | Alternatively, you could try using a backup program which uses a real | database to keep track of reused files, instead of trying to use | directory inodes and hard links as a bad substitute for the same. But a database is... more complicated and then requires special db-aware tools for a real recover. The hard link thing is very simple and very direct. It has its drawbacks (chmod/chown history being the main one that comes to my mind) but for many scenarios it works quite well. For Richard's benefit, I can report that I've used the hard link backup tree approach extensively on ext3 filesystems made with default mke2fs options (i.e. no special inode count size) and have never run out of inodes. Have you actually done some figuring to decide that running out of inodes is probable? Cheers, -- Cameron Simpson <cs@xxxxxxxxxx> DoD#743 http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/ Peeve: Going to our favorite breakfast place, only to find that they were hit by a car...AND WE MISSED IT. - Don Baldwin, <donb@xxxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ Ext3-users mailing list Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
