On Friday 07 April 2006 13:36, Matt Hyclak wrote: > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:29:58PM +0100, Anne Wilson enlightened us: > > > Strange is OK, it's the Failure's you have to worry about. > > > Looks good to me. > > > > Thanks, Matt. I think that only leaves splitting down the big one into > > smaller jobs, and I'm ready to schedule. > > > > Basically, I have some big directories containing video and photos, that > > don't compress well, but don't change very much either, while the rest is > > small files in formats that should compress well but are more fluid. I'm > > guessing that it would be useful to split them to reflect that. Or > > doesn't it matter very much? > > If you know they're not compressable, you could skip that for those > specific DLE's (e.g. use user-tar instead of comp-tar). That should save > some time and CPU cycles on your backup cycle. > That sounds worthwhile, thanks.
> If you wanted to get really fancy, you could probably change the frequency > of Level 0's on the mostly-static DLEs to save space, but I'm not sure I'd > bother with it. > OK - I'll go ahead based on your recommendations. Thanks for the speedy responses. Anne
pgpIfELlxm7Mg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
