I was hoping the docs were clear :).
"Filled" means a backup contains a complete representation of the backup.
No other backups have to be merged to view/browse/restore. Any backup can
be filled. The most recent backup is always filled.
Non-filled backups are represented only as deltas (changes
What's the difference between a filled backup and a full one?
Currently I have set FullPeriod to 120 as we would like to only do
incrementals, but what's the fillcycle?
Doc's are unclear about this, at least for non native English readers
Il 6 nov 2017 2:38 AM, "Craig Barratt via BackupPC-user
Removing --checksum will make an rsync full behave just like an incremental.
An equivalent, and clearer, way to do that is to only do incrementals.
BackupPC 4.x allows you to do that. That can be accomplished by setting
$Conf{FullPeriod} to a large value. You should also set $Conf{FillCycle}
to,
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta
wrote:
> I'm using ZFS, so checksumming is done by ZFS itself, is not an issue for me
> to skip any data corruption check, as zfs does this automatically
>
> What I would like is to keep load as low as possible on clients and
> checksumming e
Bpc is able to transfer only changed files even without checksum. If not,
incremental backups (that doesn't use checksum) won't be possible, that why
I'm asking if checksum is mandatory even for fulls
Il 27 ott 2017 6:26 PM, "Stefan Peter" ha scritto:
> Dear Gandalf Corvotempesta
> On 27.10.2017
Dear Gandalf Corvotempesta
On 27.10.2017 17:11, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
> I'm using ZFS, so checksumming is done by ZFS itself, is not an issue
> for me to skip any data corruption check, as zfs does this automatically
But this won't help BackupPC to decide which files have changed and,
there
On Fri, 27 Oct 2017 17:11:26 +0200
Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
> I'm using ZFS, so checksumming is done by ZFS itself, is not an issue
> for me to skip any data corruption check, as zfs does this
> automatically
ZFS is very good at this, but for data I'd like to have both belt and
suspenders (n
On Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:03:45 -0500
Les Mikesell wrote:
> I thought in v4 this
> mechanism is also related to the ability to match copied, moved or
> renamed files to existing matching content in the pool, so removing it
> might be a bad idea aside from eliminating the check for corruption or
>
I'm using ZFS, so checksumming is done by ZFS itself, is not an issue for
me to skip any data corruption check, as zfs does this automatically
What I would like is to keep load as low as possible on clients and
checksumming every file is slowing down everything
Il 27 ott 2017 5:04 PM, "Les Mikese
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 9:31 AM, B wrote:
>
> Correction (as often,I read much too fast):
>
>> This i going against: "I don't think so, because on incrementals BPC
>> doesn't use "--checksum" at all." (v.4.x doc):
>
> The doc doesn't speak about incrementals (only fulls), but to be sure
> abou
In my case, using checksum will slow down everything about 10 times that's
why I've asked
A full backup without checksum usually takes about 6 hours, with checksum I
need 2 days
Il 27 ott 2017 4:25 PM, "B" ha scritto:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2017 12:56:36 +0200
> Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
>
>
On Fri, 27 Oct 2017 16:24:51 +0200
B wrote:
Correction (as often,I read much too fast):
> This i going against: "I don't think so, because on incrementals BPC
> doesn't use "--checksum" at all." (v.4.x doc):
The doc doesn't speak about incrementals (only fulls), but to be sure
about this, y
On Fri, 27 Oct 2017 12:56:36 +0200
Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
> What happens if I remove "--checksum" from "full" backups ?
Monstrosities:
* an A380 will holographically crash onto your house,
* your dog/cat/children/wife/goldfish will turn gay,
* you'll awake one morning and all your machines
2017-10-27 15:10 GMT+02:00 l, rick :
> As I understand, you will pull all new files, instead of checking time
> stamps and hashing both ends, wasting storage space, as well as putting
> unneeded usage on the network.
I don't think so, because on incrementals BPC doesn't use "--checksum" at all.
-
As I understand, you will pull all new files, instead of checking time
stamps and hashing both ends, wasting storage space, as well as putting
unneeded usage on the network.
On 27-10-2017 06:56, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
What happens if I remove "--checksum" from "full" backups ?
-
What happens if I remove "--checksum" from "full" backups ?
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
16 matches
Mail list logo
