-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Les Mikesell wrote: > Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote: >> >> In fact, the POSIS/SUS specifications specifically states: >> Some implementations mark for update the st_ctime field of renamed >> files and some do not. Applications which make use of the st_ctime >> field may behave differently with respect to renamed files unless they >> are designed to allow for either behavior. >> >> However, it wouldn't be hard to add a "touch" to the chain renumbering >> routine if you want to be able to identify newly renumbered files. One >> would need to make sure that this doesn't have other unintended side >> effects but I don't think that BackupPC otherwise uses the file mtime. > > Or, just do the explicit link/unlink operations to force the filesystem > to do the right thing with ctime().
As long as the file you are dealing with has nlinks > 1 and those other files don't vanish in between the unlink/link.... rename is an atomic operation... unlink + link is not. > And I'd like a quick/cheap way so you could just ignore the pool during > a copy and rebuild it the same way it was built in the first place > without thinking twice. And maybe do things like backing up other > instances of backuppc archives ignoring their pools and merging them so > you could restore individual files directly. Would that mean your data transfer is equal to the un-pooled size though? ie, if you transfer a single pc/<hostname> directory with 20 full backups, you would need to transfer 20 X size of full backup of data. When it gets to the other side, you simply add the files from the first full backup to the pool, and then throw away (and link) the other 19 copies. Adds simplicity, but does it pose a problem with data sizes being transferred ? One optimisation would be to examine the backuppc log, and only send the files that are not "same" or some such... Anyway, I'll get out of the way and allow you to continue, I think you understand the issue better than me by far ... :) Regards, Adam - -- Adam Goryachev Website Managers www.websitemanagers.com.au -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkoxIp0ACgkQGyoxogrTyiUa9ACbBpbwsJjJ5VXJgL9E1K9ZNmNT ahUAoK5Z+GyGrOk6YYuzIYAWH4ucwBqq =MwA7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects _______________________________________________ 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/
