Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
>  > BackupPC isn't "dependent" on volume management more than any other 
>  > program.  Volume management is simply one way to get around the 
>  > limitations of storing more data than a single device will allow.  Do 
>  > you think that expanding an SQL database would be different?
> 
> It would be *very* different since you can easily copy a SQL database to
> another disk while due to the large number of hard-links, copying pool
> data is not practical except at the block filesystem level. In fact,
> rsync works very well with SQL databases.

If you're using rsync to copy database files while they're still open, 
you've completely invalidated your argument.

>  > Then I would suggest you haven't seen enough software.  Backup systems 
>  > are not trivial systems, and it should be implied that you would never 
>  > set them up without consulting their operation and requirements.
> 
> OK since you are such a software expert, name 5 common pieces of
> non-enterprise, user-space software that can't be backed up at the file
> level and instead needs to be backed up at the block level (which
> in turn pretty much implies the need for a dedicated filesystem for
> that data only)?

Now it is you who is using the straw-man argument, because backuppc 
*can* easily be backed up at the file level.  You just don't like how 
long it takes and/or that it doesn't work quickly with your favorite 
utility.  I have already mentioned that your filesystem's "dump" utility 
works perfectly well for copying your filesystem, hardlinks and all, 
ACLs and all, to another filesystem/file/tape/whatever.  I think you 
should actually sit down and use it before making claims that backuppc's 
pool isn't copyable using normal methods.

Here's a handy tip that doesn't even require temp space:

dump 0f - /pool | (cd /newpool; restore f - )

Oh, wait, you want to restore to a completely different machine?  Over 
the public internet?  Using compression and encryption?  Here you go:

dump 0f - /pool | ssh -C user@remotemachine "cd /newpool; restore f -"

And if you don't want to do a full dump ("0") then just use an 
incremental value (1, 2, etc.).

Now we can get off of the silly hardlinks suck/can't-be-backed-up 
argument and return to whether or not attrib should be turned into a 
database.
-- 
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/