Hello all,
I think this post by Holger is a pretty good explanation of the
differences between the backup types and transfer methods available
in BackupPC. Maybe this information could be reworked for inclusion
in the BackupPC documentation?
Nils Breunese.
Holger Parplies wrote:
Hi,
Hello,
I have been running BackupPC 2.1.2pl2 for several months now without
a hitch. Just now I logged into the web interface and on the status
page I see two currently running jobs. One is an incremental backup
that started an hour ago and the other is a trashClean job that
according to
I installed BackupPC 2.1.2-5 on an Ubuntu 6.10 server system for local
backups. The only tailoring I needed to do was:
* defined the directories to be backed up
* modified $Conf{TarClientCmd} = '/usr/bin/sudo $tarPath -c -v -f - -C
$shareName+'
. ' --totals';
* added
Tim writes:
I agree the display is a little confusing. One change I will
consider is to change the start time to reflect when it last
woke up. Then it is no longer technically correct, but less
confusing.
How about changing the label to wake time: then it *is* still accurate.
Norbert writes:
Contents of file /var/lib/backuppc/pc/localhost/RestoreLOG.5, modified
2007-01-20 14:52:11 (Extracting only Errors)
Running: /usr/bin/sudo /bin/tar -x -v -f - -C /home --totals
Running: /usr/share/backuppc/bin/BackupPC_tarCreate -h localhost -n 9 -s
/home -t -r /user -p
Craig writes:
I suspect it is the last line. In lib/BackupPC/Xfer/Tar.pm, try
changing:
if ( /^Total bytes written: / ) {
to
if ( /^Total bytes (written|read): / ) {
I should mention this is another change in tar 1-16. Tar 1-15 doesn't
print the string Total bytes read.
Holger writes:
Another possibility could be to write a wrapper around either ssh on the
server or tar on the client to change an exit code of 1 to an exit code of 0,
but that probably has the problem of affecting more serious errors as well
(if it was as simple as patching exit code 1 to 0,
I continue to receive child exited prematurely errors when attempting
to do an incremental backup of a WinXP client using rsyncd. I have the
latest versions of cgywin, rsync, File::RsyncP. Here is an excerpt of
the log. I wonder if it has something to do with the double forward
slash on the
Craig, fix to Tar.pm worked like a charm!
Thanks, Norbert
PS. Great application! Does everything I want it to do, with very little
effort on my part. I successfully tested out archiving today as a means
of creating monthly offline backups. Next step is backing up Windows
On 20/01/07, Holger Parplies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I read, that backuppc stores every identical file only one time.
Basically true, but BackupPC needs to determine that the file is identical to
something and to what. Sparing you the transfer (if possible with reasonable
cost) is rsyncs
I asked this at the tail end of an email back in December but no one
replied:
It seems to me that under most conditions, something with minimal overhead
(such as tar) is best for fulls while rsync is best for incrementals. As
far as I know, there's no way in backuppc to do this on the same
Krsnendu dasa wrote:
So...
With tar and smb the file is transfered then it is checked to see if
it is the same as a file already in the pool. If it is already in the
pool a link is created and the copied file is deleted.
Whereas rsync checks if the file is the same as another in the pool
I'm using BackupPC 3.0.0beta3, if it matters.
What is the difference between a Full and Incremental backup when
Pooling is involved? In a non-pooling backup scheme, a full backup
backs /everything/ up, whether or not it's changed since the last full
backup. This way, even if File A has not
You know, I am beginning to like the rsync approach better and better. I should
be getting some DDR-266 or 400 RAM very soon and will probably opt to make the
switch. Is there a way to gracefully switch over from tar to rsync? Or should I
just write off the backups I have and start over again?
14 matches
Mail list logo
