On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 15:28, Derek Atkins <de...@ihtfp.com> wrote: > > EricZolf <ewl+rdiffbac...@lavar.de> writes: > > > 3. to answer Derek's e-mail as well: would it have an impact on speed? > > To be honest, no clue, we would need to analyze this. > > Just as another data point, apparently a year ago my backup server > wasn't backing stuff up, so for the past few days my nightly backup > hasn't had anything to do for the "remove incremental > 1 year old" step > it does. You know what? Instead of the process finishing at 6-8pm it's > finishing before 8am! > > In other words, it takes 7 hours to backup all my systems, and then > 10-12 hours more to remove all the year-old incrementals. Yes, the > removal of snapshots is taking longer than the backups themselves. > > Based on this, if I had unlimited disk space I would never remove an > incremental. But disk space is not unlimited, and I figured 1 year was a > good cutoff. > > I wish this were faster. My worst offender is one particular system: 3 > hours to backup the server and 8 hours to remove an incremental from that > dataset. That seems.... unbalanced.
I never use --remove-older-than so I never hit this problem. Did you try it with --force as well? I don't see why it should be so slow, in a system based on reverse-diffs removal of the oldest data should be relatively straightforward.
