You can always run come sort of disk de-duplicater after you copy without -H
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
wrote:
> Robin Lee Powell wrote at about 20:18:55 -0800 on Sunday, December 13, 2009:
> >
> > I've only looked at the code briefly, but I believe this *should* be
>
Robin Lee Powell wrote at about 20:18:55 -0800 on Sunday, December 13, 2009:
>
> I've only looked at the code briefly, but I believe this *should* be
> possible. I don't know if I'll be implementing it, at least not
> right away, but it shouldn't actually be that hard, so I wanted to
> throw
I've only looked at the code briefly, but I believe this *should* be
possible. I don't know if I'll be implementing it, at least not
right away, but it shouldn't actually be that hard, so I wanted to
throw it out so someone else could run with it if ey wants.
It's an idea I had about rsync resum
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 03:46:50PM -0500, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> Robin Lee Powell wrote at about 15:07:04 -0800 on Saturday,
> December 12, 2009:
> >
> > It seems to me that rsync's memory bloat issues, which have
> > been discussed here many times, would be basically fixed by
> > making
On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 08:13:47PM +, Tyler J. Wagner wrote:
> Are you sure this isn't a ClientTimeout problem? Try increasing
> it and see if the backup runs for longer.
Just as a general comment (I've been reviewing all the SIGPIPE mails
and people keep saying that), no. SIGPIPE means the
> How do I fix it??
In addition to the other response, start by showing us the output of
df /mnt/backup/cpool /mnt/backup/pc
--
“Don't eat anything you've ever seen advertised on TV”
- Michael Pollan, author of "In Defense of Food"
---
Robert J. Phillips wrote:
> My raid drive failed that stores all the data. I have fixed this
> problem (rebuilt the raid and had to re-install the xfs file system).
> All the data is lost that was on the array.
>
>
>
> I am running the Beta 3.2.0 version of backuppc and I ran "sudo perl
> con
Robin Lee Powell wrote at about 15:07:04 -0800 on Saturday, December 12, 2009:
>
> It seems to me that rsync's memory bloat issues, which have been
> discussed here many times, would be basically fixed by making
> File::RsyncP and backuppc itself support rsync 3.0's incremental
> file transfe
backuppc has spontaneously a few days ago started getting stuck on a
partition on a machine that it has been dealing with fine for 120 days
now.
The logfile gives:
2009-12-02 08:46:04 incr backup 122 complete, 38 files, 46425552 bytes, 0
xferErrs (0 bad files, 0 bad shares, 0 other)
2009-12-03 0
