Jim Leonard wrote: > dan wrote: >> One of the biggest concerns with backuppc that is constantly discussed >> on this list is syncing the backup data between two or more servers. >> Simply reducing the file count by eliminating the hardlinks would allow >> rsync to be used reliably and effectively. > > It's almost as if you guys haven't heard of filesystem-specific dump > utilities. For such utils (vxdump, ufsdump, zfs send/receive, etc.) the > number of hardlinks isn't a problem. You can do both full and > incremental dumps, even across separate machines. This isn't a problem > that needs solving.
Time it before saying that. Zfs send/receive might be usable since it works strictly at the block level even in incremental mode. I believe the other tools all have to map old/new inodes in a way that will take days to complete a restore of anything resembling a typical backuppc archive. > I feel like the whole "we need an SQL/hybrid" solution discussion is > happening because you aren't aware of better ways to do things. Just > because a filesystem is a database doesn't mean it would be "better" to > replace it with a "better" database. While I'm not convinced that sql is the answer, there is a problem when you try to replicate a heavily hardlinked filesystem. Filesystems are optimized for looking up filenames, and some optimize content access by directory. They don't provide a good way to track 'other' links so you can duplicate the structure. > For anyone thinking that working with giant multi-gigabyte BLOBs in a > database is the right way to go, I suggest you actually attempt it > yourself and see what happens. I'm backing up my HD video production > rig with BackupPC, and although such a machine (Windows, 16T of storage, > most video files are at least 50G in size) is outside of the intent of > BackupPC, it actually works. If BackupPC were to rely on an SQL > database, it would greatly shrink the potential userbase. A few big files aren't nearly the same problem as millions of tiny files in terms of tracking links. Think about a bunch of users with large maildir mailboxes, for example. Backuppc handles this pretty well itself, but it presents a big problem if you try to copy its filesystem with something that needs to keep a complete table of filenames and inode numbers to track and duplicate the links. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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/