BackupPC-users

Re: [BackupPC-users] Possible to mimic the "dirvish" behaviour of rsync?

2010-12-22 09:10:01
Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] Possible to mimic the "dirvish" behaviour of rsync?
From: Andreas Piening <andreas.piening AT gmail DOT com>
To: "General list for user discussion, questions and support" <backuppc-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 15:08:28 +0100
Hi Timothy,

thank you very much for your reply. You're right: I don't want to minimize
the disk activity, but only the amount of data which is transfered over
the network.
I allready use rsync as the backup-method, so it seems I'm allready fine
with these settings.

One additional question: You say that the number of incremental backups
will slow down the backup process, which makes sense to me because
backuppc needs to iterate over all incremental backups. But which settings
are the "best" if I want a history that goes more than 7 days in the past?
For instance if I want to keep the last 14 days in the backup, is it
enough to set "FullKeepCnt=2" and leave "FullPeriod=6.97" and
"IncrPeriod=0.97"?
Does "FullKeepCnt=2" still use pooling then? What I mean is: Does it need
twice the space as with "FullKeepCnt=1", or are there still hardlinks used
to address the unchanged files?

The more I think about it the more I understand how much "magic" must be
going on in the backuppc backend!

Thank you again!

Andreas

On Tue, December 21, 2010 10:11 pm, Timothy J Massey wrote:
> Andreas Piening <andreas.piening AT gmail DOT com> wrote on 12/21/2010 
> 03:33:18
> PM:
>
>> Because I really like the benefits from backuppc (compression, re-
>> using backups of multiple occuring single files over different
>> hosts, great web-interface...) I ask myself how I can get backuppc
>> to mimic this behavior from dirvish. Is it enough to screw up
>> "FullPeriod" and "FullAgeMax" to let's say 9999999?
>> Since I'm not fine with this idea which seems to conflict with the
>> way backuppc operates, I ask for assistance.
>
> This is not necessary.  While a full backup will *read* every file on the
> target, it will not *transfer* every file from the target:  it will only
> transfer changed files (and only the changes, at that).
>
> In other words, unless you are trying to avoid disk activity on the target
> (which is *very* unlikely), simply using rsync as the transfer mechanism
> will give you what you're looking for.
>
> Don't mangle the full and incremental settings.  The longer between fulls,
> the longer the incrementals will take:  they will have more and more files
> to check every day.  A weekly full resets the changed file count, and it
> will only transfer the needed files for that time.
>
> Timothy J. Massey
> Out of the Box Solutions, Inc.
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forrester recently released a report on the Return on Investment (ROI) of
Google Apps. They found a 300% ROI, 38%-56% cost savings, and break-even
within 7 months.  Over 3 million businesses have gone Google with Google Apps:
an online email calendar, and document program that's accessible from your 
browser. Read the Forrester report: http://p.sf.net/sfu/googleapps-sfnew
_______________________________________________
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/