Thanks for this info. It was very helpful. I'm still trying to wrap my
head around the scheduling and some of the terminology in the config.pl
file.
-Rob
Holger Parplies wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote on 09.07.2007 at 08:12:18 [Re: [BackupPC-users]
> rsync
Hi,
Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote on 09.07.2007 at 08:12:18 [Re: [BackupPC-users]
rsync incremental-only backups for eternity]:
> On 07/09 08:22 , Rob Owens wrote:
> > I see that the only difference between rsync "full" and rsync
> > "incremental" backups is
On 07/09 06:31 , Jean-Michel Beuken wrote:
> in theory, in the version 3.x of BackupPC, we can take incrementals of
> different levels ( $Conf{IncrLevels} )...
> but, my little experience shows that we don't gain a lot of time with
> high level (with rsync) worse some incr takes more
> times that
Hello Carl,
Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote:
> BackupPC takes 'incrementals' against the last 'full' backup. So the farther
> you get from the last 'full', the bigger your delta against it will be.
> Obviously this depends heavily on how often your data changes; but it makes
> sense to run a full ba
On 07/09 08:22 , Rob Owens wrote:
> I see that the only difference between rsync "full" and rsync
> "incremental" backups is that "full" uses the --ignore-times option.
> Under what circumstances would this option be desirable? Seems to me
> that doing incremental backups forever would suffice
I see that the only difference between rsync "full" and rsync
"incremental" backups is that "full" uses the --ignore-times option.
Under what circumstances would this option be desirable? Seems to me
that doing incremental backups forever would suffice, but maybe I'm
missing something. What
