Am 23.11.2010 um 17:39 schrieb Martin Simmons: >> >> i started using bacula a couple of weeks ago and i am very satisfied. >> >> Today i noticed on doing an incremental backup that a file that was >> moved >> from one directory to another doesn't get stored in the backup? >> >> After doing a "touch" on the file - it got saved into the backup >> (incremental). >> >> For my sense of a backup this should be done without touching the >> file, because >> the director content changed ... >> >> Do i miss here something? >> >> Thanks >> >> PM >> >> PS: bacula-fd on osx/hfs, atime is enabled > > That is because hfs doesn't change the ctime when you move a file, > so bacula > ignores the file.
Confirmed. > You could try using accurate mode, which should fix this. > http://www.bacula.org/5.0.x-manuals/en/main/main/New_Features_in_3_0_0.html#SECTION00810000000000000000 > > __Martin Thank you for this hint, it resolved this issue. Like the manual stated, the backup process consumes much more memory. For my files (1368334) the bacula-fd allocated 200MB of memory. One thing that i found interesting: the "moved" files respectively the old locations are listed in the bacula job file list. Restoring corresponding locations shows correct behavior (moved file vanished). I wonder how bacula distinguishes between moved/deleted files. Is it because the file entry in the database has the MD5 field set to 0? Best PM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App & Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base & get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
