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

Raphael Alla wrote:
> Based on this thread, is there any benefit in doing incremental backups
> when using rsync?
> 
> It seems to me that full backup are vastly superior to incremental ones
> because:
> * They do use existing data available on the server and do not use more
> bandwidth than incremental backups
> * A partial backup is saved if the backup fails during the transfer
> * Because of the linking done, they do not use more space on the server
> than incremental backups
> * They are self dependant and do not rely on other backups
> 
> Is this correct?

Yes, but you missed the dis-advantages:
1) It uses more CPU on the backup server and client
2) It uses more disk IO

Thus, as a result, a full backup will tend to take longer than a
incremental backup. For me, an incremental can take 10 mins with a full
around 1 hour (on the same machine).

BTW, I think there is slightly more bandwidth used for a full than a
incremental.

Regards,
Adam
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFI32EyGyoxogrTyiURAiLoAKDW2S2zU55DWU/LKI9V/qfw1i2oGACffhcp
1wrKlC+rzE3TqPIxEzOA+XE=
=OHP1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:    http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/