I asked this at the tail end of an email back in December but no one 
replied:

It seems to me that under most conditions, something with minimal overhead 
(such as tar) is best for fulls while rsync is best for incrementals. As 
far as I know, there's no way in backuppc to do this on the same host. 
Right?

If not, is this an idea worth investigating, Craig?

Cheers, Stephen
--
Stephen Joyce
Systems Administrator                                            P A N I C
Physics & Astronomy Department                         Physics & Astronomy
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill         Network Infrastructure
voice: (919) 962-7214                                        and Computing
fax: (919) 962-0480                               http://www.panic.unc.edu

If you want to master emacs, it helps to believe in reincarnation, because
there is no way in hell you are going to learn it all in a single lifetime.

On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I think this post by Holger is a pretty good explanation of the differences 
> between the backup types and transfer methods available in BackupPC. Maybe 
> this information could be reworked for inclusion in the BackupPC 
> documentation?
>
> Nils Breunese.
>
> Holger Parplies wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Clemens von Musil wrote on 20.01.2007 at 00:31:12 [[BackupPC-users] 
>> Avoiding long backup times]:
>>> [...]
>>> One configured backup host  has a very slow network connection - a full
>>> backup lasts about two days. Because of the exclusive run of
>>> backuppc_nightly in 2.xx, I learned, this full backup stalls all other
>>> backups. I want to avoid tihs situation and got stuck in following:
>>> 
>>> What exactly happens during full backup?
>> 
>> that depends on the transfer method. For a slow connection, you want rsync
>> (or rsyncd), not tar or smb. For a very slow connection, you *definitely*
>> want rsync/rsyncd (which I'll just call "rsync" for simplicity).
>> 
>>> I read, that backuppc stores every identical file only one time.
>> 
>> Basically true, but BackupPC needs to determine that the file is identical 
>> to
>> something and to what. Sparing you the transfer (if possible with 
>> reasonable
>> cost) is rsyncs job. Doing so comes at a cost in terms of CPU usage, so
>> you've got the option of using tar if bandwidth is cheaper than CPU power.
>> In your case, it obviously is not.
>> 
>>> [...] What happens with an unchanged file in a full backup?
>> 
>> tar and smb will transfer it, rsync will not (presuming you mean
>> "unchanged" as in "same name, same content").
>> 
>> For a changed file, rsync will try to speed up the transfer. If you append 
>> a
>> few bytes to a large file, tar/smb will transfer the whole file (even on an
>> incremental), while rsync will (basically) transfer some checksums and the
>> few bytes only (on full and incremental backups).
>> 
>>> If the file will not be transferred again - what is the difference
>>> between full and incremenal?
>> 
>> This only applies to rsync (as tar/smb will transfer it). rsync will always
>> transfer missing files as well as update files that have apparently 
>> changed.
>> The difference between full and incremental backups lies firstly in the 
>> amount
>> of trouble rsync will go to to determine whether a file has changed or not. 
>> For
>> an incremental backup, I believe rsync will only look at size and 
>> modification
>> time, whereas for a full backup, checksums of the files are calculated, 
>> thus
>> consuming much more CPU-time and disk-I/O-bandwidth at least on the client 
>> (I
>> understand the server caches checksums if you tell it to), with the benefit 
>> of
>> detecting files that have been changed and the modification time reset.
>> The second difference is that a full backup gives a new reference point for
>> following backups while an incremental backup does not necessarily.
>> In version 2 (of BackupPC) all incrementals were relative to the last full 
>> (so
>> after one year of only incrementals you'd be transfering everything changed 
>> in
>> that year on each incremental backup), whereas version 3 supports 
>> multi-level
>> incrementals, with each incremental transfering everything changed since 
>> the
>> last incremental of lower level (resp. full backup at level 0).
>> 
>>> And if yes - does it make sense to keep one full for ever and dealing
>>> only with following incrementals?
>> 
>> No. With a very slow network connection, you want to avoid transfering
>> changes more often than necessary. Configuring multi-level incrementals in
>> BackupPC 3 seems to be simple enough that you *could* say "do incrementals 
>> of
>> increasing level each day for the next, say, 10 years", but that will make
>> browsing, restoring and even doing the backups increasingly expensive (and
>> you'll need to keep all the incrementals), even if you *can* neglect 
>> modified
>> files your backups are missing. A full backup each day *might* be your best
>> choice, because it avoids duplicating transfers. With any incrementals in
>> between, you'll have at least the fulls re-transfering everything since the
>> last full (less or equal to the sum of the intervening incrementals (plus
>> the changes since the last incremental, obviously), due to files modified
>> more than once or modified and deleted).
>> You'll have to find out the best trade-off in your specific situation
>> between retransfering file content and calculating checksums. You probably
>> need to find out first, how much data you need to transfer each day. Then
>> you can estimate, the traffic of how many days you could allow yourself to
>> transfer at once. That should be about the maximum interval between full
>> backups ...
>> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Holger
>> 
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
>> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share 
>> your
>> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
>> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
>> _______________________________________________
>> BackupPC-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
>> http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

Reply via email to