On Wed, Jan 17 2024 at 11:19:39 AM, Default User <hunguponcont...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Opinions, please.
>
> I use rsync to copy my primary backup drive to a secondary backup drive
> , so that the secondary backup drive is theoretically always an exact
> copy of the primary backup drive.
>
> Here is the rsync command I use:
>
> time sudo rsync -aAXHxvv --delete-after --numeric-ids --
> info=progress2,stats2,name2 --
> exclude={"/dev/*","/proc/*","/sys/*","/tmp/*","/run/*","/mnt/*","/media
> /*","/lost+found"} /media/default/MSD0001/ /media/default/MSD0002/
>
> Question:
> I use rsync --delete-after because it might seem to be "safer", so in
> case of a "glitch" of any kind, no file ever disappears from both the
> source drive and the destination drive.
>
What do you mean by "glitch"? Irrespective of whether you use --delete
or --delete-after, deleted files on the source are deleted on the
destination once your rsync is complete (which is what I'd assume you
want when you want an exact copy). I'd presume if you're ok with that,
you are also fine with the deletion happening earlier in the rsync
process?
If you're concerned about accidental deletions, you should just not use
any of the `--delete*` options (and give up on the exact copy
requirement). You can look at alternatives to bare rsync that keep
track of multiple backed-up images (rsnapshot is a very simple wrapper
over rsync that can do this, for example).
> However, I have read that using rsync --delete instead of rsync --
> delete-after is faster and uses less memory, and so is more efficient.
>
> Note: The current copy process time varies, but takes a long time -
> last night 131 minutes.
> :(
You can try using --delete for a couple of runs and see if it actually
affects performance in your situation.
>
> Disk space used is not currently an issue.
>
> But, is rsync --delete AS SAFE as rsync --delete-after?
You'll need to define what safety means for you.
--
regards,
kushal
