Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> In contrast, the normal usage of hard links uses a
> single inode to represent the same file albeit differing only in name.

There is nothing abnormal about the use of hard links here.  What 
operating environment are you basing your definition of "normal" on? 
This is not only normal, it is intended.  For example, granting DBAs 
access to raw database volumes that they don't have the privilege to 
create, or backup operators write access to tape volumes.  This is 
normal and *intended* usage of hard links.

> But these are *not* the same files -- they just happen to have the
> same data.

If they have the same data, they're the same files :-)  Or maybe you 
just want to argue semantics of what a "file" is.

> "kludge" is caused by the collapsing of several truly non-identical
> files (though they have the same content) onto a single inode which
> requires the creation of a separate database (called the attib file)
> to store the timestamps and rwx attributes that are normally stored
> within the filesystem itself.

Okay, fine, if this is your point then you can argue it all you like. 
You're saying that the attrib file is so incredibly inefficient and such 
a crazy hacky kludge that it should be replaced by a relational 
database.  I personally see nothing wrong with that, as a big relational 
database would be just one more component I'd have to worry about 
breaking when I apply OS patches, or lib patches, or security patches, 
or exploited by a rootkit, etc.

Here's a tip:  Your backup system should be dedicated to *backups*.  It 
should do one thing and do it well.  Why make the system more complex 
than it needs to be?  I don't want to trade the attrib file for a 
database simply because "it's cleaner".

Maybe you're thinking that backuppc is supposed to scale to an 
enterprise.  It is not.  It is a nice little system for a reasonable 
number of clients.  If you want an enterprise-grade system, you are 
barking up the wrong product.  There are open-source systems that were 
designed specifically for what you're asking for (amanda for 
medium-size, and bacula for multi-site enterprise grade backups).  But 
don't go arguing for a major redesign of backuppc just because the 
implementation isn't to your personal liking.
-- 
Jim Leonard (trixter AT oldskool DOT org)            http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project:           http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at     http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/