On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 4:49 AM, Jean Spirat <jean.spirat AT squirk DOT org> 
wrote:
>
> Hum i cannot directly use the FS i have no access to the NFS server that
> is on the hosting company side i just have access to the webserver that
> use the nfs partition to store  it's content. Right now i also mount the
> nfs share on the backup server so that way i have not the overhead of
> ssh in the mix (but yes i am on a 1000mbps  lan for the NFS and backup
> server).
>
> for my understanding  rsync had allways seems to be the most efficient
> of the two but i never challenged this "fact" ;p

Rsync working natively is very efficient, but think about what it has
to do in your case.   It will have to read the entire file across nfs
just so rsync can compere contents and decide not to copy the content
that already exists in your  backup.

>  i will have a look at tar and see if i can work with it .

I'd try rsync over ssh first, at least if most of the files do not
change between runs.   If you don't have enough ram to hold the
directory listing or if there are changes to a large number of files
per run, tar might be faster.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Windows Azure Live!  Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011
Microsoft is holding a special Learn Windows Azure training event for 
developers. It will provide a great way to learn Windows Azure and what it 
provides. You can attend the event by watching it streamed LIVE online.  
Learn more at http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-windowsazure
_______________________________________________
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/