Les Mikesell wrote: >Of course there are other ways to do things, but they aren't >necessarily going to be better. I'm not convinced that there >is much you can do to maintain any kind of structured order >over a long term when you are adding files from multiple >sources simultaneously and expiring them more or less randomly. > > It's not really random! The data are expiring because a backup of a host expires. As I said. Dirvish's performance was more than an order of magnitude better. It uses cross-links but it keeps the original tree structure for each host. To me this shows that there has to be is a better way to do things and Dave's proposal seems right on target.
>You might make it faster to traverse the directory of one >host or the pool, but in my usage those are rare operations. >You could also make it easier to do normal file-based copies >of an existing archive/pool, but there are other approaches >to this too. > > Maybe, but none is as simple and with the DB managing the metadata one may be able keep the transparency without much cost. Filename mangling isn't needed anymore. ------------------------------------------------------- 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/
