Carl Soderstrom writes:
> On 09/09 06:11 , Craig Barratt wrote:
> > Rob writes:
> > > I just noticed the $Conf{IncrLevels} setting. I'm using rsync and
> > > rsyncd as my transport, and I'd like to minimize my network usage since
> > > I'm backing up over the internet. I don't care about disk or cpu usage.
> > >
> > > Does setting:
> > > $Conf{IncrLevels} = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6];
> > > do anything to reduce my network usage? Or does rsync and the pooling
> > > mechanism already take care of that "behind the scenes".
> >
> > Yes, it will reduce the network usage. In 3.x each incremental depends
> > on the backup of the next lower level, so this means a new file that
> > appears after the last full will only be transferred once.
> >
> > Craig
>
> Is there any reason for this not to be set, or even to be the default?
The only drawback with using $Conf{IncrLevels} is there could be a
performance penalty. With a sequence of $Conf{IncrLevels}, all of
these backups need to be merged to get the baseline "view' used as
the starting point for each new backup. In many cases this could be
a worthwhile tradeoff, since re-transferring large new files likely
takes more time than merging each backup level.
There isn't a performance difference with $Conf{IncrLevels} for tar
or smbclient, since just an mtime is used as a reference.
Craig
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
