Re: [BackupPC-users] why are full backups needed with BackupPC?
On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 02:48:31PM +0100, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote: > What about "smb" method for Windows? Will full backup transfer > everything (as tar would), or will it do some magic and transfer > new/changed files only (based on timestamps etc.)? it transfers everything. > If it transfers everything, perhaps it's better to install rsynd on a > Windows machine? perhaps. depends on whether that additional complexity is worth it to you. If you are bandwidth-constrained, then probably better. If it's on a LAN, maybe not worth the hassle. danno -- dan pritts - systems administrator - internet2 734/352-4953 office734/834-7224 mobile --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] why are full backups needed with BackupPC?
On Mar 25, 2006, at 8:53 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 02:45, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote: Does the full rsync backup in BackupPC transfer only changes (compared to the last full backup), or maybe it transfers everything? It's not clear from the documentation (which states: "A full backup is a complete backup of a share."). Rsync will read everything at both ends during a full which can be fairly slow, but only a small amount of bandwidth is used for the comparison and otherwise only the changes are sent. Unless you turn on checksum caching, correct? Then the BackupPC side will not recompute the checksums for files in the pool, except for at some defined interval (randomly on 1% of the pool by default). -- Dan Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Multnomah ESD - Technology Services 503-257-1562 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] why are full backups needed with BackupPC?
On Sun, 2006-03-26 at 11:10, Dan Young wrote: > > > > Rsync will read everything at both ends during a full which > > can be fairly slow, but only a small amount of bandwidth > > is used for the comparison and otherwise only the changes > > are sent. > > Unless you turn on checksum caching, correct? Then the BackupPC side > will not recompute the checksums for files in the pool, except for at > some defined interval (randomly on 1% of the pool by default). Yes, but the other end still has to read every file so it is still a lot slower than it would be if it skipped files when the timestamp and length are still the same. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
[BackupPC-users] BackupPC_Link performance and locking out other jobs?
I'm just getting started with BackupPC and up until the last machine I added, things were going fairly well. I'm backing up to a 250Gb external USB drive, which is being incredibly slow. It's taken it something like 4 days to perform the BackupPC_dump operation, and about another 4 days now to run BackupPC_link. I've already figured out why it's being so slow in the first place, and will be correcting it as soon as this finishes running, but the behaivor of BackupPC in relation to this running job is a little unclear from what I've read in the docs. It looks like the BackupPC_link is preventing any other job from starting. I have other backups in the queue, but the status page says "idle; nothing to do" for them. Is there something about BackupPC_link that can't allow any other backups or restores to start while it runs? Is there a way to look at the current server status and actually see what's queued up and what's blocking each job from starting? Thanks, steve --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] why are full backups needed with BackupPC?
On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 09:19:02 -0500 Dan Pritts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 02:48:31PM +0100, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote: > > What about "smb" method for Windows? Will full backup transfer > > everything (as tar would), or will it do some magic and transfer > > new/changed files only (based on timestamps etc.)? > > it transfers everything. > > > If it transfers everything, perhaps it's better to install rsynd on a > > Windows machine? > > perhaps. depends on whether that additional complexity is worth it to > you. If you are bandwidth-constrained, then probably better. If it's > on a LAN, maybe not worth the hassle. To summarize, for a Windows host: - rsync over ssh doesn't work. - rsyncd transfers only diff but you need to connect with a clear password. - tar over ssh transfers every thing. - smb transfers every thing and you need to connect with a clear password. Correct me if I'm wrong. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC_Link performance and locking out other jobs?
Steve Willoughby writes: > I'm just getting started with BackupPC and up until the last machine I added, > things were going fairly well. I'm backing up to a 250Gb external USB drive, > which is being incredibly slow. It's taken it something like 4 days to > perform > the BackupPC_dump operation, and about another 4 days now to run > BackupPC_link. > > I've already figured out why it's being so slow in the first place, and will > be correcting it as soon as this finishes running, but the behaivor of > BackupPC in relation to this running job is a little unclear from what I've > read in the docs. > > It looks like the BackupPC_link is preventing any other job from starting. > I have other backups in the queue, but the status page says "idle; nothing > to do" for them. Is there something about BackupPC_link that can't allow > any other backups or restores to start while it runs? > > Is there a way to look at the current server status and actually see > what's queued up and what's blocking each job from starting? It's actually a pending BackupPC_nightly that is preventing new backups from starting. Each night BackupPC_nightly is queued, and while it is queued no new backups will be started. Since the existing BackupPC_link takes a long time to finish, BackupPC_nightly is still pending, and no new backups will start (unless you start one manually). At most a single BackupPC_link or BackupPC_nightly can run. BackupPC_dump can run in parallel with BackupPC_link, but not BackupPC_nightly. I am considering methods for the next release to reliably decouple BackupPC_dump from BackupPC_nightly. Craig --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid0944&bid$1720&dat1642 ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC_Link performance and locking out other jobs?
On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 03:03:05PM -0800, Craig Barratt wrote: > Steve Willoughby writes: > It's actually a pending BackupPC_nightly that is preventing > new backups from starting. Each night BackupPC_nightly is > queued, and while it is queued no new backups will be started. Okay, that makes perfect sense then. Thanks! --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] why are full backups needed with BackupPC?
Laurent Mazet writes: > To summarize, for a Windows host: > > - rsync over ssh doesn't work. Yes, but I haven't tested it recently. > - rsyncd transfers only diff but you need to connect with a clear password. Rsyncd doesn't send a clear password over the network. It uses a digest-based challenge/response. > - tar over ssh transfers every thing. Yes, for a full. > - smb transfers every thing and you need to connect with a clear password. I'm not sure whether smb sends clear passwords over the network. Craig --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid0944&bid$1720&dat1642 ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
