From: John Goerzen <jgoerzen@co...> - 2011-02-26 00:58:52
Les Mikesell <lesmikesell <at> gmail.com> writes:
> On 2/24/11 9:34 PM, John Goerzen wrote:
> If you rename a directory, you won't get the old contents
> underneath in their
> new locations either. You'll still have the backup in the
> old path but might not know where to find it.
That is a good point, and probably true.
> You might do better with the --whole-file option on rsync if your
> slow doing the delta/merge operations.
Is that permissible? There is a big fat warning against mucking with
Anyhow, the problem I'm referring to is this one: http://bit.ly/hIxTqE
In short, rsync on the remote end is slow doing the delta operations,
when it's BackupPC talking to it. If it's regular rsync talking to it, a
10-hour operation shrinks to a few minutes.
> > * The rsync backend for BackupPC is probably not useful unless
> > Internet backups or small backup sets to fast disks are involved.
> That's perhaps an overstatement. But you do need
> relatively fast hardware on the server side.
That is true.
> > * The "limitations" of the tar backend have been exaggerated,
> > at least
> > for backing up Linux systems with using POSIX-obeying filesystems
> > with GNU tar. (vfat under Linux may still exhibit the limitations
> > documented, for instance.)
> I think the docs combine the smb/tar description for this, and you
> would see
> the effect as described when using smb or tar on a client filesystem
> that doesn't support different mtime/ctime values.
Yes, indeed. That's why I inserted a few qualifiers into my statement ;-)
Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.