Re: [BackupPC-users] speed up backups
Les Mikesell schrieb: Ralf Gross wrote: Ok, the first rsync full backup (488) completed. It took 500min. longer than the last tar full backup (482). Backup TypeFilled Level Start Date Duration/mins Age/days 482 fullyes 0 5/19 02:05 3223.2 11.5 483 incrno 1 5/21 07:4989.6 9.2 484 incrno 2 5/22 03:05 136.4 8.4 485 incrno 3 5/23 03:05 119.1 7.4 486 incrno 4 5/24 03:05 111.4 6.4 487 incrno 1 5/25 03:05 165.9 5.4 488 fullyes 0 5/26 21:00 3744.2 3.7 489 incrno 1 5/29 12:15 394.1 1.1 490 incrno 2 5/30 03:05 190.8 0.4 I'm not sure if the checksum caching will compensate this in after the 3rd backup. Anything else I could do to tune rsync? You could force a full to start on Friday evening so weekly scheduling will keep the full runs on weekends if they take more than a night to complete. Depending on how much daily change you have, you might want to set incremental levels for the intermediate runs. I use BackupPC and bacula for backups, I once lost a complete backuppc pool/filesystem by a defect raid controller. So I need 2 backup windows. But the option to do a full backup only once in 2 weeks sounds a resonable option. What I not quite understand is that inc. backup also take much longer than before. A more extreme change would be to edit Rsync.pm to not add the --ignore-times option on fulls. I haven't needed this myself yet but I think it would make a big difference in speed - at the expense of not checking files for unlikely but possible differences. Hm, I think I'll leave this optios as it is. In the list archives I found some posts about the --whole-file option, but no definitive answer if RsyncP supports it and if it's usefull at all. Ralf -- ___ 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/
[BackupPC-users] Days since last backup is wrong
I have two backuppc computers running for two different sites. I created the 2nd one based on the image of the first one minus the pool data(remastersys). The first computer is tracking time correctly but when the 2nd backuppc computer sends out e-mail on the last successful backup, the date count is way off. For example, it says 14760.2 days instead of 5 days. I just started using the 2nd backuppc computer so I have only two clients and I can't say if the problem is one client or all computers. I can's see how it could be isolated to one client. The client is Windows 7 and I'm using SMB protocol. The message is from /usr/share/backuppc/lib/BackupPC/Lang/en.pm. and says something like this: Your PC (user) has not been successfully backed up for 14760.2 days. I noticed the message comes from $days but I can't figure out how it's calculating it wrong... Marcelino Mata Engineering Technology Specialist Multimatic Technical Centre 85 Valleywood Drive Markham, ON Canada L3R 5E5 Tel. +1 905 470 0025 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email (and attachments, if any) contain(s) information that is PRIVATE and CONFIDENTIAL, and may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. All copyright is reserved, and no right or license is granted to duplicate or publish the content of this email or to forward it to third parties, without, in each case, specific permission. If you have received this email in error, you must not copy, distribute, retain or use this email or the information contained in it for any purpose (other than to notify the sender). If you believe that you are not the intended recipient of this email, please contact the sender immediately and delete this email from your computer system (including any archive or other storage facilities). Thank you. -- ___ 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/
Re: [BackupPC-users] speed up backups
Ralf Gross wrote: What I not quite understand is that inc. backup also take much longer than before. A tar incremental looks only at the timestamps on the target directory (and will miss new or moved files with old timestamps). Rsync compares directory entries with the last full run to catch any new files regardless of timestamps and to note any deletions. And it still transfers the entire directory tree before starting. If you have a very large number of small files that never change, you might improve things by moving them into larger zip or tar archives. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com -- ___ 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/
Re: [BackupPC-users] speed up backups
Ralf Gross wrote: the RsyncP man page tells me this: http://search.cpan.org/~cbarratt/File-RsyncP-0.68/lib/File/RsyncP.pm File::RsyncP does not compute file deltas (ie: it behaves as though --whole-file is specified) or implement exclude or include options when sending file. File::RsyncP does handle file deltas and exclude and include options when receiving files. Thus no need to try the --whole-file option. That's when sending files - as in doing a restore. When doing backups RsyncP is on the receiving side and a stock rsync is sending - and will do deltas. Whether on not it is a win to compute deltas probably depends on the relationship to available bandwidth and CPU, but it might be worth a try. I'd guess --whole-file might generally be a win on files with random changes but not on growing logfiles where the deltas are all past the end of the previous copy. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com -- ___ 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/
