tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042171876169552809.post4521368794334048327..comments2008-04-08T21:05:45.600+02:00Kazik Pogodahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09604205794524759948noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042171876169552809.post-84753826951529137182008-04-08T21:05:00.000+02:002008-04-08T21:05:00.000+02:00"Non-local disk" does not imply "network storage". It could be USB or firewire drive connected to local machine - in fact it is apple's preferred way (except Time Capsule) of using Time Machine - mainly because of the amount of data to transfer. With wireless or even 100Mb/s ethernet network it is far slower then locally connected external disk.<BR/><BR/>Flyback seems interesting. However personally I would rather concentrate on porting ZFS to linux. ZFS has TM features on filesystem level (in fact apple has already added ZFS support in Darwin - I hope it will be the default filesystem in next releases). As Sun hired Ian Murdock I hope that one day Debian will run also OpenSolaris kernel. I wonder which comes first - Debian running on top of Solaris kernel or ZFS support on Linux? :) Meanwhile we can enjoy Ubuntu based http://www.nexenta.org/ with ZFS enabled by default.morisilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09604205794524759948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042171876169552809.post-83035210868887720202008-04-08T06:57:00.000+02:002008-04-08T06:57:00.000+02:00Well, in general, backup (time machine is not exactly backup, I know) on local disc makes little sense, so network backup is a must. It could be even made on FTP (with strong data encryption before uploading files). I wonder how it will be made in http://flyback-project.org/roziehttp://rozie.jogger.pl/noreply@blogger.com