This seems to store the zfs send stream. That's a bad idea.
> Incremental ZFS send streams do not have any of these properties and full ZFS send streams only have a few of them. Neither full nor incremental streams have any resilience against damage to the stream; a stream is either entirely intact or it's useless. Neither has selective restores or readily available indexes. Incremental streams are completely useless without everything they're based on. All of these issues will sooner or later cause you pain if you use ZFS streams as a backup format.
If you’re looking to ZFS send streams for many of ZFS’s guarantees, absolutely.
However ZFS replication was originally designed with the assumption and use case in mind that organizations would store the send streams as opaque blobs on tape. This is, in part, why storing send streams as blobs is still a thing people do.
There are some use cases where this makes sense. I’ve stored full send streams of archived ZFS file systems in S3(-compatible services) where integrity is handled at the platform level. In that use case I didn’t benefit from having every copy of the filesystem in question running on live storage media, and incremental sends/snapshots weren’t on the table. (I also SHA checksummed the resulting files, and did restore tests.)
There is also a misconception that frequently gets brought up in the ZFS community that the send stream format isn’t stable between versions and cannot be relied upon in future, but it absolutely is stable. In fact the ZoL manpage for send explicitly states that it is. As with anything in ZFS though, you want to move versions forward or not at all, rather than backward.
we are writing blobs/ objects to zfs tape volumes. it gives us an extra layer of defense from ransom attacks and satisfies our 321 requirement. We make the blobs transparent with some metadata tags. The objects are recorded in the catalog and we can pull individual files out of the blob. deepspace storage manages the tape gateway and catalog for the objects. short answer yes storing send streams to tape is doable robust workflow.
Thank you! Yeah, a 7.4 is humongous. I did wonder about this because my wife's family reported quite intensive shaking and I've been in a 6-something before and that was quite disruptive. I can't imagine a 5.1 being that much.
One pitfall of this is that the decompressed contents of your initramfs must fit within half of your physical RAM since Linux decompresses it into a tmpfs.
Or if you set rootfstype=ramfs, then you can take up to all of physical RAM, but ramfs isn't swappable.
Wait I'm not following, why must the decompressed contents of the initramfs fit within half of physical ram?
Initramfs (and tmpfs) are swappable right? As you say, ramfs is the one that isn't swappable. So if your initramfs is "to big" can't it just be swapped out?
> Wait I'm not following, why must the decompressed contents of the initramfs fit within half of physical ram?
It makes sense if you replace "initramfs" with "initrd":
> One pitfall of this is that the decompressed contents of your ~initramfs~ _initrd_ must fit within half of your physical RAM since Linux decompresses it into a tmpfs.
> Or if you set rootfstype=ramfs, then you can take up to all of physical RAM
I'm very confused by your comment. The grandparent comment talks about using the gitrevisions syntax in a GitHub URL to search the reflog stored on GitHub. Nothing to do with your local clone of a repository.
Seriously, all the people of my parents generation have a physical book with account names and passwords in it. You keep it in a safe place, and nobody can hack it remotely.
Plus, should your heirs or caretakers need to access it, it's all there in plain text for them.
Other than a few web forums, I don't use my phone for anything that requires a password. Certainly not for email, banking, or anything that involves personal data, money, or business. A lot of stuff, I don't do on my desktop either.
Anything connected to the internet is insecure. No, it's not as convenient to do things by phone or paper mail, but I value security more than convenience.
> Incremental ZFS send streams do not have any of these properties and full ZFS send streams only have a few of them. Neither full nor incremental streams have any resilience against damage to the stream; a stream is either entirely intact or it's useless. Neither has selective restores or readily available indexes. Incremental streams are completely useless without everything they're based on. All of these issues will sooner or later cause you pain if you use ZFS streams as a backup format.
https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/solaris/ZFSSendNotA...