On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 03:11:50PM -0800, Craig Barratt wrote: > I should probably change BackupPC to use 2^30 too; I don't know > why I picked 1000 * 2^20 - maybe that's what disk drives use > for raw capacity?
I would suggest this, since that is what most things report. > The pool size is the sum of the number of blocks used for each > file in the pool. In general that should be less than reported > by "df" since the pc directories contain full directory trees > (just containing hardlinks of course) and Xfer log files that > occupy some disk space. There is going to be overhead for the directories, but some filesystems (notably reiserfs) store the tails of files without requiring a full block for them. I've found that so far, the space used by the directories (which is also fairly efficient on reiserfs) is quite a bit less than space saved by the more efficient storage of tails. I'm not going to run du again since it takes a very long time, but last time I did it, there was about 1.5 GB of space difference between du, and df (of 16GB total). Each backup tree took about 30-100MB, so they would even each other out after about 20 or so backups. Dave ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
