Bowie Bailey wrote at about 16:08:49 -0400 on Thursday, April 24, 2014:
 > On 4/24/2014 3:52 PM, backuppc AT kosowsky DOT org wrote:
 > > Bowie Bailey wrote at about 14:38:26 -0400 on Thursday, April 24, 2014:
 > >   > Think of incremental backups this way...
 > >   >
 > >   > Pros:
 > >   > 1) They finish running quicker.
 > >   >
 > >   > Cons:
 > >   > 1) They can miss backing up files in certain circumstances
 > >   > 2) They cause the same data to be transferred multiple times.
 > >   >      - Each incremental will transfer all the same data as the previous
 > >   > one plus any new changes
 > >   >      - The next full backup will also need to transfer all of that data
 > >   > again.
 > >
 > > Not quite.
 > >
 > > Only data changed/added since the previous level incremental needs to be
 > > transferred.
 > 
 > True, but I was trying to keep things fairly simple.  Besides, I don't 
 > think I've seen an example of a situation where multiple levels of 
 > incrementals were needed in BackupPC.

Perhaps. I use 4 levels of incrementals that cycle through twice for
each full. Why? No good reason. Probably because I thought it was
interesting and because I needed to play with multiple levels of
incrementals to test some of my code.

Fulls only using rsync with checksum seeding is arguably the best
combination....

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
_______________________________________________
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/