-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Raphael Alla wrote: > Based on this thread, is there any benefit in doing incremental backups > when using rsync? > > It seems to me that full backup are vastly superior to incremental ones > because: > * They do use existing data available on the server and do not use more > bandwidth than incremental backups > * A partial backup is saved if the backup fails during the transfer > * Because of the linking done, they do not use more space on the server > than incremental backups > * They are self dependant and do not rely on other backups > > Is this correct?
Yes, but you missed the dis-advantages: 1) It uses more CPU on the backup server and client 2) It uses more disk IO Thus, as a result, a full backup will tend to take longer than a incremental backup. For me, an incremental can take 10 mins with a full around 1 hour (on the same machine). BTW, I think there is slightly more bandwidth used for a full than a incremental. Regards, Adam -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFI32EyGyoxogrTyiURAiLoAKDW2S2zU55DWU/LKI9V/qfw1i2oGACffhcp 1wrKlC+rzE3TqPIxEzOA+XE= =OHP1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
