On Apr 13 2021, Grunthos <[email protected]> wrote:
> OK..I just found this http://www.rath.org/s3ql-docs/tips.html which
> suggests exactly the solution I have used.
>
> I wonder if there *might* be a better option for full file-system restore,
> one of:
>
>
> - copy the entire collection S3QL data from the remote to local first,
> then do a restore-from-local
> - add a special s3ql command to do a 'tree copy' -- it would know
> exactly which blocks it needed and download them en-masse while restoring
> files (and would need a lot of cache, possibly even a temporary cache
> drive)
> - a limited version of the above option to pre-fill the cache with all
> remote data blocks needed for a particular part of the tree
Yes, all of these would be possible and probably be faster. I think
option (2) would me the best one.
Pull requests are welcome :-).
Best,
-Nikolaus
--
GPG Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F
»Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"s3ql" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/s3ql/877dl5l3mg.fsf%40vostro.rath.org.
