Re: [BackupPC-users] Which filesystem for external backup drive?
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 11:05 PM wrote: > > Also, I find btrfs snapshots to be very valuable. Especially, if I am > messing/playing around with backuppc... that way I can easily revert > if I mess something up... > > Snapshots have also saved me when I have run across the occasional > backuppc gremlin of disappearing files in that I can find the cpool > file and revert it from past snapshots. Are you sure that the disappearing files aren't a quirk of btrfs in the first place? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
Re: [BackupPC-users] Which filesystem for external backup drive?
Michael Stowe wrote at about 03:57:34 + on Friday, February 5, 2021: > On 2021-02-04 16:27, Kenneth Porter wrote: > > --On Thursday, February 04, 2021 5:13 PM +0100 Alexander Kobel > > wrote: > > > >> Distro support is a serious thing to consider. In general, backuppc > >> will > >> happily work with whatever is the default file system of your > >> distribution. For CentOS and RedHat, XFS is the obvious choice, and > >> BTRFS > >> will not give you any benefit except for compression, but potentially > >> a > >> wealth of trouble. You shouldn't need a whole lot of fancy features > >> like > >> snapshotting, copy-on-write, deduplication etc. on your pool anyways. > > > > I think I'm down to XFS vs ext4. Are there any strong advantages of > > either for use as a BackupPC pool? > > For what it's worth, I don't recommend XFS. I used XFS for quite a > while specifically with BackupPC, and the problem was fairly subtle > corruption that XFS could not recover from. > > I also disagree that one doesn't need copy-on-write. Presumably, you > want your backups to be reliable, and not implode at the first power > failure? > > On the other hand, I've heavily used btrfs, and I'm with Kosowsky, it's > absolutely rock solid. I wouldn't recommend its RAID5 or 6 > implementations, but it's proven to be excellent in a mirror or singles. > If you're using Red Hat, you might want to go with ext4, otherwise, > btrfs or ext4 are excellent choices. xfs isn't. Also, I find btrfs snapshots to be very valuable. Especially, if I am messing/playing around with backuppc... that way I can easily revert if I mess something up... Snapshots have also saved me when I have run across the occasional backuppc gremlin of disappearing files in that I can find the cpool file and revert it from past snapshots. ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
Re: [BackupPC-users] Which filesystem for external backup drive?
On 2021-02-04 16:27, Kenneth Porter wrote: --On Thursday, February 04, 2021 5:13 PM +0100 Alexander Kobel wrote: Distro support is a serious thing to consider. In general, backuppc will happily work with whatever is the default file system of your distribution. For CentOS and RedHat, XFS is the obvious choice, and BTRFS will not give you any benefit except for compression, but potentially a wealth of trouble. You shouldn't need a whole lot of fancy features like snapshotting, copy-on-write, deduplication etc. on your pool anyways. I think I'm down to XFS vs ext4. Are there any strong advantages of either for use as a BackupPC pool? For what it's worth, I don't recommend XFS. I used XFS for quite a while specifically with BackupPC, and the problem was fairly subtle corruption that XFS could not recover from. I also disagree that one doesn't need copy-on-write. Presumably, you want your backups to be reliable, and not implode at the first power failure? On the other hand, I've heavily used btrfs, and I'm with Kosowsky, it's absolutely rock solid. I wouldn't recommend its RAID5 or 6 implementations, but it's proven to be excellent in a mirror or singles. If you're using Red Hat, you might want to go with ext4, otherwise, btrfs or ext4 are excellent choices. xfs isn't. -- Michael ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: To top-post or not?
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 6:29 PM Kenneth Porter wrote: > > The biggest pain is finding an MUA that can support both and allows the > different quoting style. In interleaved, prefix the quote with "> ". In > top-post, copy the message below a separator line with no prefix. Has > anyone found a decent MUA that can do that? I love the ancient Mulberry for > mailing lists. But it insists on prefix-quoting when I top-post. So does > Thunderbird, which I use in parallel to deal with HTML email (which is > useful for support for inline images, like when a customer is reporting a > broken product). If you are willing to use gmail, the web interface mostly hides the already-read quoted parts whether they are above or below the new text, replacing them with an elipse (...) that you can click to expand in the unlikely event that you want to see it again. So it doesn't matter much whether the new part was on the top or bottom. And when you reply, if you expand the old part it shows as >prefixed if you want to interleave your reply or trim the quoted part. -- les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: To top-post or not?
Kenneth Porter wrote at about 16:26:19 -0800 on Thursday, February 4, 2021: > --On Thursday, February 04, 2021 11:24 AM +0100 Sorin Srbu > wrote: > > > I'll continue to end-post as before. :-) > > Not end/bottom post! That's really no better than top-posting, because we > still have to scroll down through the massive post you're quoting. > > Brutally trim the post you're replying to and INTERLEAVE your reply. So > it's trimmed/interleave you want to go for on public mailing lists. > > Top-posting is fine for private/business where you add correspondents as > the conversation progresses. > > The biggest pain is finding an MUA that can support both and allows the > different quoting style. In interleaved, prefix the quote with "> ". In > top-post, copy the message below a separator line with no prefix. Has > anyone found a decent MUA that can do that? Emacs vm! It's all written in lisp allowing you to do whatever you want... Nothing more powerful, nothing more simple! > I love the ancient Mulberry for > mailing lists. But it insists on prefix-quoting when I top-post. So does > Thunderbird, which I use in parallel to deal with HTML email (which is > useful for support for inline images, like when a customer is reporting a > broken product). > ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: To top-post or not?
> On Feb 4, 2021, at 7:28 PM, Kenneth Porter wrote: > > --On Thursday, February 04, 2021 11:24 AM +0100 Sorin Srbu > wrote: > >> I'll continue to end-post as before. :-) > > Not end/bottom post! That's really no better than top-posting, because we > still have to scroll down through the massive post you're quoting. > > Brutally trim the post you're replying to and INTERLEAVE your reply. So it's No one has voted for split posting yet. > trimmed/interleave you want to go for on public mailing lists. > > Top-posting is fine for private/business where you add correspondents as the > conversation progresses. > > The biggest pain is finding an MUA that can support both and allows the > different quoting style. In interleaved, prefix the quote with "> ". In > top-post, copy the message below a separator line with no prefix. Has anyone > found a decent MUA that can do that? I love the ancient Mulberry for mailing > lists. But it insists on prefix-quoting when I top-post. So does Thunderbird, > which I use in parallel to deal with HTML email (which is useful for support > for inline images, like when a customer is reporting a broken product). > > > > > > ___ > BackupPC-users mailing list > BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net > List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users > Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki > Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/ > ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: To top-post or not?
--On Thursday, February 04, 2021 11:24 AM +0100 Sorin Srbu wrote: I'll continue to end-post as before. :-) Not end/bottom post! That's really no better than top-posting, because we still have to scroll down through the massive post you're quoting. Brutally trim the post you're replying to and INTERLEAVE your reply. So it's trimmed/interleave you want to go for on public mailing lists. Top-posting is fine for private/business where you add correspondents as the conversation progresses. The biggest pain is finding an MUA that can support both and allows the different quoting style. In interleaved, prefix the quote with "> ". In top-post, copy the message below a separator line with no prefix. Has anyone found a decent MUA that can do that? I love the ancient Mulberry for mailing lists. But it insists on prefix-quoting when I top-post. So does Thunderbird, which I use in parallel to deal with HTML email (which is useful for support for inline images, like when a customer is reporting a broken product). ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
Re: [BackupPC-users] Which filesystem for external backup drive?
--On Thursday, February 04, 2021 5:13 PM +0100 Alexander Kobel wrote: Distro support is a serious thing to consider. In general, backuppc will happily work with whatever is the default file system of your distribution. For CentOS and RedHat, XFS is the obvious choice, and BTRFS will not give you any benefit except for compression, but potentially a wealth of trouble. You shouldn't need a whole lot of fancy features like snapshotting, copy-on-write, deduplication etc. on your pool anyways. I think I'm down to XFS vs ext4. Are there any strong advantages of either for use as a BackupPC pool? ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: To top-post or not?
On 2/3/2021 9:09 AM, Sorin Srbu wrote: Hello all, Years ago when I last worked daily, and before my timeout, with BPC, the deal was to not top post. There were usually corrective comments if somebody forgot him/herself and in no uncertain terms. Has that changed over the years, and one can now top-post without infuriating and invoking the wrath of the senior members and list admins on this list? Seeing as how most mailers now top-post per default, I thought I'd ask... Thanks for any insights. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? An old quote, but I always thought it summarized things nicely. I use top-posting for business and casual emails, but bottom / interleaved for mailing list replies. The only exception is when there is already an established chain of top-posted replies since the most confusing thing of all is an email chain where top and bottom posting have been intermixed. -- Bowie ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
Re: [BackupPC-users] Which filesystem for external backup drive?
Hi, On 2/4/21 5:02 AM, Kenneth Porter wrote: On 2/3/2021 6:54 PM, backu...@kosowsky.org wrote: I just built backuppc for my Raspberry PI and ordered an external SSD drive that I plan to format in btrfs. I'm using CentOS, and it looks like Red Hat is dropping btrfs in favor of other filesystems: (also in the light of last week's thread about BTRFS+compression) a very valid point. BTRFS is in the kernel, so it's unlikely that you won't find a system to read your files from anytime soon. But obviously, there's a mixed bag of opinions about BTRFS - RedHat ends support in 2019, and Fedora makes it the default in 2020? Seriously? I'm at loss there. Distro support is a serious thing to consider. In general, backuppc will happily work with whatever is the default file system of your distribution. For CentOS and RedHat, XFS is the obvious choice, and BTRFS will not give you any benefit except for compression, but potentially a wealth of trouble. You shouldn't need a whole lot of fancy features like snapshotting, copy-on-write, deduplication etc. on your pool anyways. Cheers, Alex smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
[BackupPC-users] Bug/annoyance with continued incrementing of interrupted backups
When backups number N is initiated, it is initially labeled as 'active'. If interrupted, it is labeled as 'partial'. Then when a backup is tried again, it is numbered 'N+1' and again labeled as 'active'. This proceeds ad-infinitum until a successful backup is completed. The result can be large and seemingly needless holes in the backup numbering -- even in the course of a single day. This happens frequently with laptops that may not always be connected to the network. Is there any compelling reason for this behavior? This could easily be fixed either at the end of an aborted backup or at the beginning of the next backup attempt by simply decrementing the last entry in the 'backup' file and by renumbering the partial directory and the associated log file. Thanks, Jeff ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: To top-post or not?
On Wed, 2021-02-03 at 14:51 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 1:41 PM wrote: > > Paul Leyland wrote at about 18:59:24 + on Wednesday, February 3, 2021: > > > I have, very reluctantly, been forced to accept top-posting. > > > > Sadly, that has become too true. My solution is that a short answer is > > easier/simpler to top-post -- but any serious and in-depth dialog is > > much better off being woven into the earlier posting so that one can > > see context and not have to rewrite or reread. > > I'd guess that these days enough people use gmail's web interface that > collapses 'already read' content to ellipses that you can ignore or > expand that it doesn't really matter whether the new part is at the > top or bottom. But yes if you need to reply to different parts it > should be interwoven. Ok, thanks all for your insights and comments. To summarize, it seems like my questions can be answered with "maybe", "sometimes" and "it depends". :-) I'll continue to end-post as before. :-) -- Kind regards, Sorin Srbu Find my OpenPGP public key here: https://cloud.srbu.se/index.php/s/KeEsCCDsG7PZG7N signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki:https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
