|
Re: [BackupPC-users] Another jLib/fixLinks issue.
2010-12-09 19:10:21
Robin Lee Powell wrote at about 15:38:27 -0800 on Thursday, December 9, 2010:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 12:35:46AM -0500, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> > Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote at about 13:58:28 -0500 on Tuesday, December 7,
> > 2010:
> > > Robin Lee Powell wrote at about 15:40:04 -0800 on Monday, December 6,
> > 2010:
> > > > This is *fascinating*.
> > > >
> > > > >From the actually-fixing-stuff part of the run, I get:
> > > >
> > > > ERROR:
> > "tm50-s00292__nfs/68/f%2f/fshared/fthepoint/fsite_images/f0042/f4097/fMULTI_medium.jpg"
> > - Too many links if added to "59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec"
> > > >
> > > > to which I say "lolwut?" and investigate.
> > > >
> > > > $ ls -li /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec*
> > > > 2159521202 -rw-r----- 31999 backuppc backuppc 76046 Oct 7 08:29
> > /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec
> > > > 2670969865 -rw-r----- 31999 backuppc backuppc 76046 Oct 16 15:15
> > /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec_0
> > > > 79561977 -rw-r----- 31999 backuppc backuppc 76046 Oct 22 22:07
> > /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec_1
> > > > 156369809 -rw-r----- 31999 backuppc backuppc 76046 Oct 31 09:06
> > /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec_2
> > > > 3389777838 -rw-r----- 31999 backuppc backuppc 76046 Nov 7 09:10
> > /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec_3
> > > > 106188559 -rw-r----- 31999 backuppc backuppc 76046 Nov 13 15:10
> > /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec_4
> > > > 247044591 -rw-r----- 31999 backuppc backuppc 76046 Nov 19 17:20
> > /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec_5
> > > > 293083240 -rw-r----- 31999 backuppc backuppc 76046 Nov 26 06:14
> > /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec_6
> > > > 513555136 -rw-r----- 31999 backuppc backuppc 76046 Dec 1 19:37
> > /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec_7
> > > > 52908307 -rw-r----- 7767 backuppc backuppc 76046 Dec 4 10:37
> > /backups/cpool/5/9/c/59c43b51dbdd9031ba54971e359cdcec_8
> > > > $ ls -li
> > /backups/pc/tm50-s00292__nfs/68/f%2f/fshared/fthepoint/fsite_images/f0042/f4097/fMULTI_medium.jpg
> > 374791856 -rw-r----- 1 backuppc backuppc 76046 Dec 4 08:03
> > /backups/pc/tm50-s00292__nfs/68/f%2f/fshared/fthepoint/fsite_images/f0042/f4097/fMULTI_medium.jpg
> > > >
> > > > That's a bunch of files with *thirty two thousand* hard links.
> > > > Apparently that's a limit of some kind. BackupPC handles this by
> > > > adding new copies, a hack that BackupPC_fixLinks is apparently
> > > > unaware of.
> > >
> > > BackupPC_fixLinks does know about the limit and in fact is careful not
> > > to exceed it (using the same hack) when it combines/rewrites links.
> > > Other than that, I'm not sure where you think BackupPC_fixLinks needs
> > > to be aware of it?
> > >
> > > To be fair, since I don't have any systems with that many hard links,
> > > I have not tested that use case so perhaps my code is missing
> > > something (I haven't looked through the logic of how BackupPC_fixLinks
> > > traverses chains in a while so maybe there is something there that
> > > needs to be adjusted for your use case but again since I haven't
> > > encountered it I probably have not given it enough thought)
> > >
> >
> > Robin, can you let me know in what way you think BackupPC misses
> > here? It seems to me that my program does the following:
> >
> > 1. It avoids calling a pool element a duplicate if the sum of the
> > number of links in the duplicates exceeds the maximum link number
> > (i.e. the pool duplicate is justified)
> >
> > 2. When it fixes/combines links, it avoids exceeding the maximum
> > link number and creates a new element of the md5sum chain instead.
> >
> > Is there any other way that maxlinks comes into play that I am
> > missing?
>
> *blink*
>
> I was under the impression that it did *not* do "creates a new
> element of the md5sum chain instead.".
>
> I took the error to mean "I see too many links to this file already,
> so screw it, I'm giving up and leaving this file alone".
>
> If the file *does* get linked in despite the error, then yeah,
> that's totally fine
I believe the logic is that that error is only seen when the file is
already linked into the pool either pre-existing or earlier in the run
-- so all that happens is that it doesn't consolidate already existing
pool links. And that is why I commented it as it is
But feel free to look at the code and/or your results to make sure
that I am remembering this right and that I coded it right in the
first place. Fresh eyes can never hurt...
> although I'd change the wording. I read "Too
> many links if added" to mean "so I'm not going to add it".
>
Already done!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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/
|
|
|
