BackupPC-users

Re: [BackupPC-users] Backing up a BackupPC server

2009-06-02 17:51:34
Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] Backing up a BackupPC server
From: "Jeffrey J. Kosowsky" <backuppc AT kosowsky DOT org>
To: "General list for user discussion, questions and support" <backuppc-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:45:33 -0400
Les Mikesell wrote at about 16:10:41 -0500 on Tuesday, June 2, 2009:
 > Peter Walter wrote:
 > > 
 > >> Somehow I don't see how having to install, tune, and maintain an 
 > >> otherwise unneeded database fits into the concept of abstracting away 
 > >> functionality.  You have to live with filesystems anyway so you might as 
 > >> well learn how to manage them.
 > >>   
 > > Les has been a strong advocate for his position. However, backuppc as it 
 > > is currently designed does not meet my need to remotely backup all kinds 
 > > of  computers, including other backuppc servers. I think the 
 > > enhancements Jeffrey Kosowsky and I have outlined in this discussion 
 > > would solve my problem, as well as a number of other problems, would 
 > > significantly extend the functionality of backuppc, and also make it 
 > > compatible with other platforms. I am therefore going to take this 
 > > discussion over to the backuppc-devel and ask Craig what he and others 
 > > over there think. Hopefully, I can sucker a perl developer to start 
 > > coding it as an add-on to the current development release.
 > 
 > Backing up other backuppc servers is really a special case that might 
 > deserve a special optimization.   But, I'm not sure that adding a 
 > database automatically makes it any easier - unless you are thinking of 
 > a common database that could arbitrate a common hashed filename that is 
 > unique across all instances for every piece of content.  That's an 
 > interesting idea but seems kind of fragile.
 > 

Once we are talking about redoing things, I would prefer to use a
full md5sum hash for the name of the pool file. You end up
calculating this anyway for free when you use the rsync method
(although with protocol <=28, you get a full file md4sum but with
protocol >=30, I believe you have the true md5sum). This would
simplify the ambiguity of having multiple indexed chain entries with
the same partial md5sum.

With this approach then you would automatically have "a common hashed
filename that is ['statistically'] unique across all instances for
every piece of content."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises 
looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the latest 
innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and 
enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization. 
Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
_______________________________________________
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/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>