On 28/05/2014 13:42, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
>>> Currently, I do the following:
>>> > > Every year, a full backup
>>> > > Then, every month, I have an incremental based on either the yearly or
>>> > > previous monthly.
>>> > > Ditto for the weekly (but then based on monthly or weekly)
>>> > > And ag
On Wednesday 28 May 2014 13:07:49 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 28/05/2014 11:58, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Tuesday 27 May 2014 23:35:26 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >> On 27/05/2014 17:12, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> >>> I have a yearly (full), monthly, weekly and daily. Each incremental is
> >>> against the
On 28/05/2014 11:58, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 May 2014 23:35:26 Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> On 27/05/2014 17:12, J. Roeleveld wrote:
>>> I have a yearly (full), monthly, weekly and daily. Each incremental is
>>> against the most recent one of itself or longer period.
>>> That means having
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 6:13 AM, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> "app-backup/dar" uses catalogues for the incrementals. I think I will stick to
> that for the foreseeable future.
>
I used to use that and sarab (which is a wrapper). I moved on to
duplicity. The problem with dar is that it uses quite a
On Tuesday 27 May 2014 11:28:17 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:12 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 10:31:26 AM Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> btrfs wouldn't have any issues with this at all. You'd have an
> >> advantage in that you wouldn't have to unmount the file
On Wed, 28 May 2014 12:03 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> Always important. I just saw the other email which states that the
> latest sysresccd supports it. That is fine for me.
Sysresccd has supported btrfs for some time. I realise my mail could have
been read otherwise, but the reason for keepi
On Tuesday 27 May 2014 11:32:22 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:21 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > Does anyone know how these will handle (and perform) with a possible 300+
> > snapshots per filesystem (or volume, as I think it's called)?
>
> I can't speak for zfs. I had upwards of
On Tuesday 27 May 2014 23:35:26 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 27/05/2014 17:12, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > I have a yearly (full), monthly, weekly and daily. Each incremental is
> > against the most recent one of itself or longer period.
> > That means having to keep multiple snapshots active, which I pre
On 27/05/2014 17:12, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> I have a yearly (full), monthly, weekly and daily. Each incremental is
> against
> the most recent one of itself or longer period.
> That means having to keep multiple snapshots active, which I prefer to avoid.
>
> But, it is a good idea for backing up
On Tue, 27 May 2014 11:32:22 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Oh, one other tip if you use btrfs - be sure you have a rescue disk
> that supports it. Hint, the old Gentoo install CD I had lying around
> didn't. You'll probably want to keep a rescue CD with a recent kernel
> and btrfs-tools handy at
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:21 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> Does anyone know how these will handle (and perform) with a possible 300+
> snapshots per filesystem (or volume, as I think it's called)?
I can't speak for zfs. I had upwards of 1000 snapshots on my system
before I stopped creating them hou
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:12 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 10:31:26 AM Rich Freeman wrote:
>> btrfs wouldn't have any issues with this at all. You'd have an
>> advantage in that you wouldn't have to unmount the filesystem to
>> cleanly create the snapshot (which you have to
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 05:12:50 PM J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 10:31:26 AM Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:09 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Forgot to add:
For fileservers, I am starting to feel that ZFS or BTRFS snapshots are easier
to work with as it makes r
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 10:31:26 AM Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:09 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > I am still happily using LVM with snapshots. Those are instantaneous as
> > well and I can then backup the snapshot, which on my server takes between
> > 2 hours (incremental) and 3
14 matches
Mail list logo
