On Friday 01 May 2009 15:56:17 Paweł Madej wrote:
> On piątek, 1 maja 2009 13:22:55 Silver Salonen wrote:
> >
> > But I thought of the other-way approach when writing the original e-mail -
> > what if I only include new files, not exclude old files? And when I ran a
> > job with such a fileset, it took only minutes. I'll test this approach and
> > see whether everything is correct etc.
>
> Please write here what are results of this test because I'm very
interested.
> How about the fact that changed fileset will advance incremental backup to
> full?
Well, the full job with such an include list went down from ~800GB to 52GB
(I'm including only files that are newer than 70 days, because I keep 2 full
backups total, so all the older files will be part of the archive-type backup
with one copy only). Unfortunately the backup-disk ran out of space, so the
archive-type backup couldn't complete, but it's supposed to be ~750GB now,
theoretically.
One point about it though.. the find-script finds some files having ^M in the
filename. Such a filename is not valid in Bacula, so these files aren't
included in the fileset. Fortunately these files should be put into our
archive-type backup, because it excludes files the same way as the normal
backup includes them, so these files aren't excluded from there either and
will be backed up.
But the job won't upgrade to full, because I've got "Ignore Fileset Changes =
yes".
--
Silver
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations
Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of
expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry
leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf
and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
|
