Re: [BackupPC-users] Rsynv vs. tar, full vs. incremental

2011-09-03 Thread G.W. Haywood
Hi there, On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 Pavel Hofman wrote: I guess the main problem is tar cannot resume after a network glitch, Can you simply tweak the TCP settings in /proc/sys/net/ so that the connection can cope with a ~one-minute break and tar doesn't notice? -- 73, Ged.

Re: [BackupPC-users] Rsynv vs. tar, full vs. incremental

2011-08-26 Thread Pavel Hofman
Dne 31.5.2011 21:57, Holger Parplies napsal(a): Hi, Pavel Hofman wrote on 2011-05-31 15:24:56 +0200 [[BackupPC-users] Rsynv vs. tar, full vs. incremental]: Incremental backup of a linux machine using tar (i.e. only files newer than...) is several times faster than using rsync

[BackupPC-users] Rsynv vs. tar, full vs. incremental

2011-05-31 Thread Pavel Hofman
Hi, Incremental backup of a linux machine using tar (i.e. only files newer than...) is several times faster than using rsync. On the other hand, full backup using tar transfers huge amount of data over network, way more than the efficient rsync. Is there a way to use rsync for full backup and

Re: [BackupPC-users] Rsynv vs. tar, full vs. incremental

2011-05-31 Thread Holger Parplies
Hi, Pavel Hofman wrote on 2011-05-31 15:24:56 +0200 [[BackupPC-users] Rsynv vs. tar, full vs. incremental]: Incremental backup of a linux machine using tar (i.e. only files newer than...) is several times faster than using rsync. that could be because it is missing files that rsync catches