Rich writes: > If a file has been renamed or moved it looks like rsyncd/BackupPC jobs > will redownload the file even though the file is already in the pool
As Les said: yes it will download files again if there isn't a matching path name in a previous backup. As it is downloaded it will be matched against the pool, so it won't be written to disk. So while there is a tranfer overhead in this case, there is no storage (or even disk write) penalty. > I'm currently perusing the sources to see if there is a way to work > around that. Has anyone already investigated this? Am I headed down a > dead-end? Yes you are. When rsync transfers the file list it doesn't contain file checksums (unless you specify --checksum, which File::RsyncP doesn't support). Also, the rsync whole-file checksum is different to the BackupPC pool checksum, so it isn't useful for trying to find files in the pool. Craig ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ BackupPC-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-devel http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
