Am 23.11.2010 um 17:39 schrieb Martin Simmons:
>>
>> i started using bacula a couple of weeks ago and i am very satisfied.
>>
>> Today i noticed on doing an incremental backup that a file that was
>> moved
>> from one directory to another doesn't get stored in the backup?
>>
>> After doing a "touch" on the file - it got saved into the backup
>> (incremental).
>>
>> For my sense of a backup this should be done without touching the
>> file, because
>> the director content changed ...
>>
>> Do i miss here something?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> PM
>>
>> PS: bacula-fd on osx/hfs, atime is enabled
>
> That is because hfs doesn't change the ctime when you move a file,  
> so bacula
> ignores the file.


Confirmed.



> You could try using accurate mode, which should fix this.
> http://www.bacula.org/5.0.x-manuals/en/main/main/New_Features_in_3_0_0.html#SECTION00810000000000000000
>
> __Martin



Thank you for this hint, it resolved this issue.

Like the manual stated, the backup process consumes much more memory.

For my files (1368334) the bacula-fd allocated 200MB of memory.


One thing that i found interesting: the "moved" files respectively
the old locations are listed in the bacula job file list. Restoring
corresponding locations shows correct behavior (moved file vanished).

I wonder how bacula distinguishes between moved/deleted files. Is it
because the file entry in the database has the MD5 field set to 0?

Best

PM



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App & Earn a Chance To Win $500!
Tap into the largest installed PC base & get more eyes on your game by
optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the
Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users