Re: [Bacula-users] How are "new" files determined?
On 12/30/21 02:03, Sebastian Suchanek wrote: > Hi everyone! > > How exactly are "new" files, which have to be backed up, determined by > Bacula? Hello Sebastian, In addition to what Josip said, take a look at the "Accurate" option for Filesets. This will let you adjust what attributes Bacula looks at to determine if a file needs to be backed up. However, I would say that Josip's way is probably better in this instance. Typically we recommend to modify this Accurate mode if Filesets when some scheduled task (ie: AntiVirus) touches every file, or makes some other attribute modification. In these cases simply adjusting what Bacula checks is the answer. Best regards, Bill -- Bill Arlofski w...@protonmail.com ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] How are "new" files determined?
On 2021-12-30 11:37, Gary R. Schmidt wrote: On 30/12/2021 20:03, Sebastian Suchanek wrote: Hi everyone! How exactly are "new" files, which have to be backed up, determined by Bacula? The reason for asking: Recently, I migrated my main data to a new set of hard drives. I did so by using "rsync -aH" which *should* leave all file timestamps etc. untouched. After the migration was finished, also all paths etc. were exactly the same as before, just with a new set of HDDs "underneath". However, in the next scheduled Bacula run (which was scheduled as Incremental), Bacula stared to backup *everything* of the abovementioned data. (I cancelled the job and will resume doing backups on this particular fileset with next regular Full backup which is scheduled for the upcoming Sunday anyway.) So - what went wrong here and how could this have been avoided? The inodes *all* changed, it is effectively a new file system, it will need to be fully backed up. The documentation says that Bacula decides what files to backup for Incremental and Differential backup by comparing the change (st_ctime) and modification (st_mtime) times of the file to the time the last backup completed. I performed a simple test exactly a month ago. What changes during the restore is the change time (st_ctime). That's why Bacula decides to backup restored files with the next Incremental backup (after the restore). The case with rsync copy is similar to the the restoration. st_ctime is used to keep the time of the last change on the inode (e.g. ownership, permissions, hard link count and maybe something else). Rsync option -a (archive) includes options -r, -l, -p, -t, -g, -o, -D. None of these options will preserve change time thus bacula will see all the files as candidates for backup. As Gary said, this is a new file system with newly created inodes so all the files now probably have the change time that corresponds to the time when the rsync did the copy. This can be checked with the stat(1) tool. Regards! -- Josip Deanovic ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Re: [Bacula-users] How are "new" files determined?
On 30/12/2021 20:03, Sebastian Suchanek wrote: Hi everyone! How exactly are "new" files, which have to be backed up, determined by Bacula? The reason for asking: Recently, I migrated my main data to a new set of hard drives. I did so by using "rsync -aH" which *should* leave all file timestamps etc. untouched. After the migration was finished, also all paths etc. were exactly the same as before, just with a new set of HDDs "underneath". However, in the next scheduled Bacula run (which was scheduled as Incremental), Bacula stared to backup *everything* of the abovementioned data. (I cancelled the job and will resume doing backups on this particular fileset with next regular Full backup which is scheduled for the upcoming Sunday anyway.) So - what went wrong here and how could this have been avoided? The inodes *all* changed, it is effectively a new file system, it will need to be fully backed up. Cheers, GaryB-) ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
[Bacula-users] How are "new" files determined?
Hi everyone! How exactly are "new" files, which have to be backed up, determined by Bacula? The reason for asking: Recently, I migrated my main data to a new set of hard drives. I did so by using "rsync -aH" which *should* leave all file timestamps etc. untouched. After the migration was finished, also all paths etc. were exactly the same as before, just with a new set of HDDs "underneath". However, in the next scheduled Bacula run (which was scheduled as Incremental), Bacula stared to backup *everything* of the abovementioned data. (I cancelled the job and will resume doing backups on this particular fileset with next regular Full backup which is scheduled for the upcoming Sunday anyway.) So - what went wrong here and how could this have been avoided? Regards Sebastian ___ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
