Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install
2009-09-03 06:14:57
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 12:40:45PM -0400, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> > IMO the easiest approach would be:
> > - if BackupPC_nightly starts, it acquires a lock, then waits for backups
> > to complete
> > - no new backups start until BackupPC_nightly finished
> >
> > This should be rather easy since it could be implemented at the central
> > scheduling code - actually BackupPC_nightly wouldn't be started, just
> > the flag would be set that it wants to.
> >
> > I would like such automatism (configurable, of course) as well since it
> > just sucks to guess backup periods and to keep some time reserved for
> > nightly maintenance.
> >
>
> I like this idea and I agree it would be easy to implement.
> And by configurable, I assume you mean at a minimum the ability to
> turn on/off this option.
Exactly. Something like
# If set to 1, wait for running backups to complete before running
# BackupPC_nightly. Also, no new backups will be started until the
# nightly cleanup is finished.
$Conf{NoBackupsDuringBackupPCNightly} = 1;
By the way: The same should be configurable for the trash cleaner. It
does about the same to disk I/O as the nightly - it make the disk head
spin around like mad since a lot of virtually random inodes need to be
touched. Therefore, a config like
# Configure trash cleaning strategy:
# 1 = continuous - wake up every $Conf{TrashCleanSleepSec} and check for
# files to delete (default pre 3.2 behaviour B-) )
# 2 = run only just before BackupPC_nightly - see
# $Conf{DelayBackupsDuringBackupPCNightly} to disable backups during
# that operation
$Conf{TrashCleanMethod} = 1;
Hm... does anybody volunteer to implement that? I could take a look and
try to figure out a patch but I've not yet digged into the BackupPC
scheduling code...
Tino.
--
"What we nourish flourishes." - "Was wir nähren erblüht."
www.lichtkreis-chemnitz.de
www.craniosacralzentrum.de
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, (continued)
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Tino Schwarze
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, James Ward
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Jon Craig
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Tino Schwarze
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, James Ward
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, James Ward
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install,
Tino Schwarze <=
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Holger Parplies
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Les Mikesell
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
- Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Craig Barratt
Re: [BackupPC-users] 2.x behavior desired on 3.1 install, Craig Barratt
|
|
|