Frans Pop wrote:
>> If this is really the way backuppc does incremental backups, I think
>> backuppc should be a bit more incremental with its incremental backups.
>> Instead of comparing against the last full, it should compare against the
>> last full and incremental backups. This would solve this problem and make
>> backuppc more efficient anyway, AFAIK.
>
> That proposal goes completely against the basic principles of incremental
> backups!
What principles, and how do they apply to a system where all copies of
everything are pooled?
> If you want something like that, you should use multiple levels of
> incremental backups.
I thought that was an option in 3.0 but I haven't used it yet. If your
targets aren't doing anything else at night you can just do rsync fulls
every time and waste a few cpu cycles.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
