[CentOS] A questiong about replacing my failing drive

[Rodrigo Barbosa]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 11:05:26PM +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> Also I don't see why it would take ages ? It seems to be pretty 
> sequential, it doesn't have any filesystem overhead. And in case you have 
> bad blocks it is able to reduce blocksize to recover as much as possible 
> (which of course is slower during recovery, there's no alternative though), 
> with a filesystem you're pretty much f*cked.

When you are producing lots of copies, you don't want to copy
empty space. DD will copy everything.

> I'm not sure if you ever tried it, but dd (or ddrescue) is much faster 
> than what you would normally see as throughput at the filesystem level, 
> especialy when you have bad blocks.

True. That is why I said I recomend ghost for when you are producing
multiple copies. Not for backup, and definitively not for a recovery
procedure.

[]s

- -- 
Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob at suespammers.org>
"Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur"
"Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCrNnbpdyWzQ5b5ckRAl/lAJ0YHHG57pgU1FM++mx9dq6VjbpmowCeK5+B
HacVI/7mEiA6rKTYuyMhkVg=
=1h/k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----