On 8/28/09, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately I was testing on the same disk where I do a weekly image
> copy so I'll have to start over later - but I do have another place to
> try it.  What does it use to map the hardlinks internally?  Is this
> likely to remain correct if backuppc rebuilds collision chains in the
> pool during a copy - or even before the next incremental?

I'm not very familiar with the internals of BackupPC, but if you have
a set of files that are hard-linked, back them up with HashBackup,
delete the files, back that up, then recreate the hard-linked files
and back them up again, it should work even though the new series of
files will likely have different inodes.

> Even if that is handled safely or the copy is made with backuppc
> stopped, I expect a restore to take an impractical amount of time to
> reconstruct all of the links - but I hope I'm wrong.

Hmm, I think restores might actually be faster, because decompression
is much faster than compression, and also because physical writes can
be buffered / delayed in the OS whereas physical reads can't.  I could
be wrong though...

Jim

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
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/