patrick/zfs_autobackup
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Updated Common snapshots and holds (markdown)

DatuX
2022-04-28 17:58:35 +02:00
parent 21c0f4e7aa
commit 7b658fdb91
1 changed files with 6 additions and 4 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
Common-snapshots-and-holds.md

@ -24,17 +24,19 @@ To prevent accidental deletion of the common snapshot zfs-autobackup uses holds.
This can be quite frustrating for new users who try to delete old datasets that still have holds. (`Dataset is busy`) Use `zfs holds ` and `zfs release` to release a snapshot.
If you know what you're doing you can use --no-holds.
## Holds and offline backups
For offline backups holds are even more important.
Normally when you split up the snapshotting part and backupping part you would do it like this: [[https://github.com/psy0rz/zfs_autobackup/wiki#splitting-up-snapshot-and-backup-job]]
The snapshotter will still connect to the target server and figure out the common snapshot so that they wont be destroyed. It can also cleanup old snapshots from the source if it sees that target doesn't need them (anymore)
However, if you have an offline backup (e.g. a USB disk that you sometimes connect), you are force to use the snapshot-only tool. You would just run zfs-autobackup without specifying a target dataset or ssh-target.
However, if you have an offline backup (e.g. a USB disk that you sometimes connect), you are forced to use the snapshot-only tool. You would just run zfs-autobackup without specifying a target dataset or ssh-target. In that case it only makes snapshots and cleans up old snapshots according to the --keep-source schedule.
Now holds are very important: In snapshot-only mode it looks at the holds to see which snapshots are common. Otherwise it might accidentally destroy them if you have a tight --keep-source schedule.
In this case the holds are more important: Now the tool looks at the holds to see which snapshots are common. Otherwise it might accidentally destroy them if you have a tight --keep-source schedule.