David Brown wrote:

>When files are no longer used, they are simply deleted, and those numbered
>slots are never used.
>
>There is _NO_ linking in my proposal, that is it's point.  Also, if you
>hash the entire file, instead of just the beginning, and you use a strong
>enough hash function, there won't be any collisions.  Rsync is already
>assuming this.
>  
>
Hi David,

I personally like your proposal quite a bit.  That's why I was asking. 
One the filenames: As they don't matter it might be nice to give them
there original name  and directory structure for transparency outside
backuppc.

Not sure if hashing the entire file is a good idea, at least not by
default.  Unless you make sure that the hash is only computed
occasionally this will really hurt performance.  It's why
--checksum isn't the default with rsync.

>I'm not going to discuss this proposal any further.  The way that backuppc
>(and other programs) work is too ingrained in people's thinking to realize
>that there are other ways to do things.
>  
>
I generally dislike such statements. They  stop otherwise healthy
discussions.   That said,  you may be right here. If only because
implementing your proposal may imply changing a lot of the core
structure of backuppc and a fresh start, stealing some pieces from
backuppc, might be a better approach.

BTW, I barely understand how backuppc is working. It's workings are
surely not ingrained in my mind. On the contrary I am still struggling
to understand why distinguishing full and incremental backups is
necessary if one uses rsync.  To me it this seems like a relict from
tape archives. Same for doing full based on the last full, not the last
filled-in incremental.

... Matt


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

Reply via email to