Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[BackupPC\-users\]\s+SMB\s+vs\s+RSYNCD\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [BackupPC-users] SMB vs RSYNCD (score: 1)
Author: clint woodrow <backuppc-forum AT backupcentral DOT com>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 19:50:08 -0400
Thanks for the details Matthias. I was wondering if one of you could confirm something else for me. We've been testing BackupPC for the last few months. The local backup server is up and running grea
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/BackupPC-users/2009-06/msg00091.html (13,580 bytes)

2. Re: [BackupPC-users] SMB vs RSYNCD (score: 1)
Author: Adam Goryachev <mailinglists AT websitemanagers.com DOT au>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:42:41 +1000
No, rsync handles the transfer, so you will only transfer (approximately) 2k for the changes. (Obviously there are additional overheads for the non-changed sections, but they are very small). However
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/BackupPC-users/2009-06/msg00095.html (14,547 bytes)

3. Re: [BackupPC-users] SMB vs RSYNCD (score: 1)
Author: Holger Parplies <wbppc AT parplies DOT de>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 06:01:30 +0200
Hi, clint woodrow wrote on 2009-06-02 19:50:08 -0400 [[BackupPC-users] SMB vs RSYNCD]: this is true as long as rsync can properly detect the changes. I don't know anything about the format of PST fil
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/BackupPC-users/2009-06/msg00096.html (13,520 bytes)

4. Re: [BackupPC-users] SMB vs RSYNCD (score: 1)
Author: Adam Goryachev <mailinglists AT websitemanagers.com DOT au>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:18:56 +1000
BTW, if it is any help, another possible solution is to not backup the pst files, but use an IMAP compatible server, which uses maildir format, and then you can backup the IMAP server. We do this in
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/BackupPC-users/2009-06/msg00097.html (13,276 bytes)

5. Re: [BackupPC-users] SMB vs RSYNCD (score: 1)
Author: "Jeffrey J. Kosowsky" <backuppc AT kosowsky DOT org>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 01:20:43 -0400
Adam Goryachev wrote at about 13:42:41 +1000 on Wednesday, June 3, 2009: Said another way, BackupPC only does pooling and de-duplication at the file level. To get the "1GB + 2k" you would need to poo
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/BackupPC-users/2009-06/msg00104.html (14,923 bytes)

6. [BackupPC-users] SMB vs RSYNCD (score: 1)
Author: clint woodrow <backuppc-forum AT backupcentral DOT com>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:00:08 -0400
Thanks for the clarification everyone. Of course, what I'd really prefer is getting rid of PSTs entirely. When we move up to the next version of Exchange, the database size limit will be sufficiently
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/BackupPC-users/2009-06/msg00160.html (16,147 bytes)

7. Re: [BackupPC-users] SMB vs RSYNCD (score: 1)
Author: Matthias Meyer <matthias.meyer AT gmx DOT li>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 22:53:29 +0200
I would believe that ZFS will support this. If you run Backuppc in [Open]Solaris with ZFS as filesystem it should work. br Matthias -- Don't Panic -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Tri
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/BackupPC-users/2009-06/msg00214.html (16,474 bytes)

8. [BackupPC-users] SMB vs RSYNCD (score: 1)
Author: "Robert J. Phillips" <rphillips AT garden-city DOT org>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 14:10:14 -0500
When I first started using BackupPC I was letting the backups happen with SMB. I have since found and figured out how to make it work the process to use vshadow and rsyncd. I think now that I underst
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/BackupPC-users/2009-05/msg00089.html (13,158 bytes)

9. Re: [BackupPC-users] SMB vs RSYNCD (score: 1)
Author: Matthias Meyer <matthias.meyer AT gmx DOT li>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 22:29:05 +0200
rsync(d) transmit only changed parts of a file (http://www.samba.org/rsync). e.g. a 2.6 GB mailbox.pst and receive one new mail at sunday. rsync will only transmit this one new mail. And you need a c
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/BackupPC-users/2009-05/msg00090.html (12,158 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu