On 03/13/2012 03:25 PM, Robinson, Eric wrote:
Using rsync to copy a local directory to a remote computer takes a 67 seconds.
Using rdiff-backup to backup the same local directory to a remote computer takes
11 minutes. Why does rdiff-backup go so slow? Does the number of increments on
the remote computer influence the speed? We keep 30 previous daily increments
The number of increments is irrelevant since rdiff-backup is working only
with the most recent version (the mirror). What will make rdiff-backup
slower than rsync is the need to calculate and store the reverse diffs. In
particular, when there is a large volume of newly deleted files it can take
some time to compress and store the old, now deleted files. I see this
mainly when there has been a Linux kernel update that caused an old kernel
version to be uninstalled. That's a lot of files that need be compressed,
stored in the increments directory, and removed from the mirror, whereas
rsync would just need to remove the old files. Deleting a 4GB ISO image is
be another example of something that would be very fast for rsync but quite
time consuming for rdiff-backup.
--
Bob Nichols "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address.
Do NOT delete it.
_______________________________________________
rdiff-backup-users mailing list at rdiff-backup-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rdiff-backup-users
Wiki URL: http://rdiff-backup.solutionsfirst.com.au/index.php/RdiffBackupWiki
