Hi,
Ray Frush wrote on 2017-05-30 16:53:18 -0600 [Re: [BackupPC-users] Question
about transient inodes]:
> Holger-
>
> Thanks for the followup. That's not exactly the answer I was expecting
> based on the behavior we experienced. Once all of the initial 'full'
&g
Parplies wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ray Frush wrote on 2017-05-23 15:37:36 -0600 [[BackupPC-users] Question
> about transient inodes]:
> > [...]
> > Can a developer comment on under what conditions BackupPC might be
> > temporarily allocating a lot of extra inodes,
Hi,
Ray Frush wrote on 2017-05-23 15:37:36 -0600 [[BackupPC-users] Question about
transient inodes]:
> [...]
> Can a developer comment on under what conditions BackupPC might be
> temporarily allocating a lot of extra inodes, and then quickly releasing
> them?
none.
Reg
I'm adding systems in earnest to my new BackupPC 4.1.2 installation, and
I've encountered an interesting problem.
My current pool uses a decent number of inodes:
cpool:7864978
pc:11504955
For a total of 19,369,933 objects.
However, my NFS filesystem, which had 50M pre-allocated inodes, and a ma
