From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] lucio- From: "Russ Cox" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 20:42:11 -0500 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5f518542-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > I believe that the current implementation of dump snapshotting > bogs down the fileserver so it would be annoying to run it > when people are doing work and that is why dump snapshotting > runs in the wee hours at Bell Labs. Another advantage (I don't know whether it is a reason) is that 5am is a time when things are reasonably quiet. The files as they are at 5am is more likely to be something I want to remember than what they are at 3pm, say, when things are typically in flux. If anyone cares, here's the elapsed times for the last week of dumps: mon 2:32 tue 3:22 wed 3:48 thu 2:58 fri 3:48 sat 4:12 sun 2:29 mon 2:22 As you say, it would not be hard at all to use something like sequence numbers to make the dump faster. Perhaps that is what NetApp does. I'm still not convinced that allowing anyone to force a dump really helps with the revision control problem though. Personally, I like the fact that the dump takes a few minutes. When I get on a bad sleep schedule, the dump is usually enough to convince me to stop what I'm doing and go to bed. Russ