On 8/28/09, Les Mikesell <lesmikes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Unfortunately I was testing on the same disk where I do a weekly image > copy so I'll have to start over later - but I do have another place to > try it. What does it use to map the hardlinks internally? Is this > likely to remain correct if backuppc rebuilds collision chains in the > pool during a copy - or even before the next incremental?
I'm not very familiar with the internals of BackupPC, but if you have a set of files that are hard-linked, back them up with HashBackup, delete the files, back that up, then recreate the hard-linked files and back them up again, it should work even though the new series of files will likely have different inodes. > Even if that is handled safely or the copy is made with backuppc > stopped, I expect a restore to take an impractical amount of time to > reconstruct all of the links - but I hope I'm wrong. Hmm, I think restores might actually be faster, because decompression is much faster than compression, and also because physical writes can be buffered / delayed in the OS whereas physical reads can't. I could be wrong though... Jim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ 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/
