Hi, Kenneth Porter wrote on 30.10.2007 at 07:35:03 [[BackupPC-users] rsync versus other transports (was: Tar use)]: > > I'm using smb (easy to set up initially) and was considering deploying > rsync to my Windows 2003 servers. How does the smbclient's incremental tar > actually work? Is it using some incremental feature of the SMB protocol I'd > been previously unaware of, or is it just enumerating the remote directory > tree and collecting files with timestamps newer than a reference timestamp?
timestamps. As BackupPC uses the smbclient executable, it cannot compare file lists but only pass in a timestamp and get back all newer files in a tar stream. I've read of plans to use a Perl module instead of smbclient (which sounds promising), but I have no idea whatsoever if and when that change might be expected. > Will rsync also look only for "newer" files or will it also detect the > arrival of older files (eg. copied in from a workstation that touched them > before the last full backup)? rsync should take file trees and all attributes into account, meaning it should both detect older files as you described and files that changed in length but kept the timestamp for instance. rsync will also detect deletion of files. If you're looking at the exactness of incremental backups, rsync is way ahead of tar/smb. I believe this, rather than bandwidth considerations, warrants a general recommendation of rsync. Regards, Holger ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list [email protected] List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
