On Friday 07 April 2006 13:36, Matt Hyclak wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:29:58PM +0100, Anne Wilson enlightened us:
> > > Strange is OK, it's the Failure's you have to worry about.
> > > Looks good to me.
> >
> > Thanks, Matt.  I think that only leaves splitting down the big one into
> > smaller jobs, and I'm ready to schedule.
> >
> > Basically, I have some big directories containing video and photos, that
> > don't compress well, but don't change very much either, while the rest is
> > small files in formats that should compress well but are more fluid.  I'm
> > guessing that it would be useful to split them to reflect that.  Or
> > doesn't it matter very much?
>
> If you know they're not compressable, you could skip that for those
> specific DLE's (e.g. use user-tar instead of comp-tar). That should save
> some time and CPU cycles on your backup cycle.
>
That sounds worthwhile, thanks.

> If you wanted to get really fancy, you could probably change the frequency
> of Level 0's on the mostly-static DLEs to save space, but I'm not sure I'd
> bother with it.
>
OK - I'll go ahead based on your recommendations.  Thanks for the speedy 
responses.

Anne

pgpQYgFptk8Bi.pgp
Description: PGP signature