> I'm not sure what you mean by 'pool' here. The only thing relevant to > what a backuppc rsync transfer will copy is the previous full of the > same machine. Files of the same name in the same location will use the > rsync algorithm to decide how much, if any, data needs to be copied - > anything else will be copied in full. When a newly transferred file is > being linked to the pool, it may be discovered at that point that > identical content already exists and a link will be made to save storage > space.
Is this true? Why not just send the checksum/name/date/permissions of the file first and see if it exists already and link it in if it does. If the file does not exist by name but there is a checksum for the file, then just use the vital data to link in the file and you're done. I'm thinking Backuppc shouldn't need to send the entire file for that? Of course if there is no checksum then it is entirely a new file. If the checksum is different but the filename is there then send it via rsync, etc etc... ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
