Utility of --backup
>From what I understand `--backup-dir` uses a hierarchical backup. And >`--suffix` appends the value in `--suffix` to the end of each file. What happens when one specifies both `--backup-dir` and `dest`. Is `--backup-dir` a replacement to `dest`, or not ? From: Charles To: lisa-as...@perso.be; rsync@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: Utility of --backup Date: 20/07/2021 02:37:50 Europe/Paris > And let me do what you suggest. What is the difference, and is --backup > better than the other ? Only in conjunction with -backup-dir, for example --backup --backup-dir=_Changed and deleted files/2021/Jul/19@21:21 The man page's entry for --backup suggests using it with either --backup-dir or --suffix On 19/07/2021 19:22, lisa-as...@perso.be wrote: > From: Charles via rsync > To: rsync@lists.samba.org > Subject: Re: Utility of --backup > Date: 19/07/2021 14:26:59 Europe/Paris > > >IThe --backup option is great for creating "rolling full" backups which > >look exactly like the backed up tree except for the existence of the > >backup directory > > I am not really understanding the "Rolling Full Backup". Suppose I have > a directory > and use `rsync -av --progress --log-file="$logfl" "$source" "$destin"` > > And let me do what you suggest. What is the difference, and is --backup > better than the other ? > > Would the command be > > rsync --backup -v --progress --log-file="$logfl" "$source" "$destin" > > >Here's how a Linux backup directory tree looks as created by backup > >utility bung's bu_rsync script > > +-- bin -> usr/bin > +-- boot > | +-- grub > +-- _Changed and deleted files > | +-- 2021 > | +-- Jul > | | +-- 01@17:45 > | | | +-- opt > | | | | +-- tomcat > | | | +-- root > | | | +-- var > | | | +-- backups > | | | +-- cache > | | | +-- lib > | | | +-- local > | | | +-- log > | | | +-- mail > | | | +-- spool > ... > | | +-- 17@17:46 > ... > | | +-- 18@17:45 > ... > | +-- Jun > ... > | +-- 29@17:45 > ... > | +-- 30@17:45 > ... > +-- dev > +-- etc > ... > > >A "rolling full" backup is great to restore from for small organisations > >which do not do enough restores to be well practised because the backup > >looks exactly like the source except for the additional "_Changed and > >deleted files" directory. > > >Perfect point in time restores are not possible but adequate > >approximations (point in time but with the possibility of some extra > >files) can be done by restoring the last backup and then each of the > >changed and deleted files sets until the latest set after the desired > >point in time > -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Utility of --backup
From: Charles To: lisa-as...@perso.be; rsync@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: Utility of --backup Date: 20/07/2021 02:37:50 Europe/Paris > And let me do what you suggest. What is the difference, and is --backup > better than the other ? Only in conjunction with -backup-dir, for example --backup --backup-dir=_Changed and deleted files/2021/Jul/19@21:21 The man page's entry for --backup suggests using it with either --backup-dir or --suffix This means that everything is the same except that you get a backup tracking system that uses `--backup-dir`. Could you be so kind to tell me some more details about the use of `--suffix`. As with `- -backup-dir`, an example would be very instructive for me. Regards Lisa On 19/07/2021 19:22, lisa-as...@perso.be wrote: > From: Charles via rsync > To: rsync@lists.samba.org > Subject: Re: Utility of --backup > Date: 19/07/2021 14:26:59 Europe/Paris > > >IThe --backup option is great for creating "rolling full" backups which > >look exactly like the backed up tree except for the existence of the > >backup directory > > I am not really understanding the "Rolling Full Backup". Suppose I have > a directory > and use `rsync -av --progress --log-file="$logfl" "$source" "$destin"` > > And let me do what you suggest. What is the difference, and is --backup > better than the other ? > > Would the command be > > rsync --backup -v --progress --log-file="$logfl" "$source" "$destin" > > >Here's how a Linux backup directory tree looks as created by backup > >utility bung's bu_rsync script > > +-- bin -> usr/bin > +-- boot > | +-- grub > +-- _Changed and deleted files > | +-- 2021 > | +-- Jul > | | +-- 01@17:45 > | | | +-- opt > | | | | +-- tomcat > | | | +-- root > | | | +-- var > | | | +-- backups > | | | +-- cache > | | | +-- lib > | | | +-- local > | | | +-- log > | | | +-- mail > | | | +-- spool > ... > | | +-- 17@17:46 > ... > | | +-- 18@17:45 > ... > | +-- Jun > ... > | +-- 29@17:45 > ... > | +-- 30@17:45 > ... > +-- dev > +-- etc > ... > > >A "rolling full" backup is great to restore from for small organisations > >which do not do enough restores to be well practised because the backup > >looks exactly like the source except for the additional "_Changed and > >deleted files" directory. > > >Perfect point in time restores are not possible but adequate > >approximations (point in time but with the possibility of some extra > >files) can be done by restoring the last backup and then each of the > >changed and deleted files sets until the latest set after the desired > >point in time > -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Utility of --backup
> And let me do what you suggest. What is the difference, and is --backup > better than the other ? Only in conjunction with -backup-dir, for example --backup --backup-dir=_Changed and deleted files/2021/Jul/19@21:21 The man page's entry for --backup suggests using it with either --backup-dir or --suffix On 19/07/2021 19:22, lisa-as...@perso.be wrote: From: Charles via rsync To: rsync@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: Utility of --backup Date: 19/07/2021 14:26:59 Europe/Paris >IThe --backup option is great for creating "rolling full" backups which >look exactly like the backed up tree except for the existence of the >backup directory I am not really understanding the "Rolling Full Backup". Suppose I have a directory and use `rsync -av --progress --log-file="$logfl" "$source" "$destin"` And let me do what you suggest. What is the difference, and is --backup better than the other ? Would the command be rsync --backup -v --progress --log-file="$logfl" "$source" "$destin" >Here's how a Linux backup directory tree looks as created by backup >utility bung's bu_rsync script +-- bin -> usr/bin +-- boot | +-- grub +-- _Changed and deleted files | +-- 2021 | +-- Jul | | +-- 01@17:45 | | | +-- opt | | | | +-- tomcat | | | +-- root | | | +-- var | | | +-- backups | | | +-- cache | | | +-- lib | | | +-- local | | | +-- log | | | +-- mail | | | +-- spool ... | | +-- 17@17:46 ... | | +-- 18@17:45 ... | +-- Jun ... | +-- 29@17:45 ... | +-- 30@17:45 ... +-- dev +-- etc ... >A "rolling full" backup is great to restore from for small organisations >which do not do enough restores to be well practised because the backup >looks exactly like the source except for the additional "_Changed and >deleted files" directory. >Perfect point in time restores are not possible but adequate >approximations (point in time but with the possibility of some extra >files) can be done by restoring the last backup and then each of the >changed and deleted files sets until the latest set after the desired >point in time -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Utility of --backup
In Backup.rsync, which of course is a wrapper around rsync that can be used for backups, I do not use --backup, but I do use --link-dest: https://stromberg.dnsalias.org/~strombrg/Backup.remote.html On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 11:13 PM Lisa via rsync wrote: > I would like some feedback about the --backup option in rsync. Is > it worth using it for backups, or should I just use rsync > commands that just transfer files without the use of --backup > option? > > -b, --backup make backups (see --suffix & --backup-dir) > --backup-dir=DIR make backups into hierarchy based in DIR > --suffix=SUFFIX backup suffix (default ~ w/o --backup-dir) > > I am somewhat hesitant to use it because with the backup option, > preexisting destination files are renamed as each file is > transferred or deleted. It also says that previously backed-up > files could get deleted. Thusly I need some assistance > understanding all the pros and cons. > > -- > Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. > To unsubscribe or change options: > https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync > Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Utility of --backup
From: Charles via rsync To: rsync@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: Utility of --backup Date: 19/07/2021 14:26:59 Europe/Paris >IThe --backup option is great for creating "rolling full" backups which >look exactly like the backed up tree except for the existence of the >backup directory I am not really understanding the "Rolling Full Backup". Suppose I have a directory and use `rsync -av --progress --log-file="$logfl" "$source" "$destin"` And let me do what you suggest. What is the difference, and is --backup better than the other ? Would the command be rsync --backup -v --progress --log-file="$logfl" "$source" "$destin" >Here's how a Linux backup directory tree looks as created by backup >utility bung's bu_rsync script +-- bin -> usr/bin +-- boot | +-- grub +-- _Changed and deleted files | +-- 2021 | +-- Jul | | +-- 01@17:45 | | | +-- opt | | | | +-- tomcat | | | +-- root | | | +-- var | | | +-- backups | | | +-- cache | | | +-- lib | | | +-- local | | | +-- log | | | +-- mail | | | +-- spool ... | | +-- 17@17:46 ... | | +-- 18@17:45 ... | +-- Jun ... | +-- 29@17:45 ... | +-- 30@17:45 ... +-- dev +-- etc ... >A "rolling full" backup is great to restore from for small organisations >which do not do enough restores to be well practised because the backup >looks exactly like the source except for the additional "_Changed and >deleted files" directory. >Perfect point in time restores are not possible but adequate >approximations (point in time but with the possibility of some extra >files) can be done by restoring the last backup and then each of the >changed and deleted files sets until the latest set after the desired >point in time -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Utility of --backup
IThe --backup option is great for creating "rolling full" backups which look exactly like the backed up tree except for the existence of the backup directory Here's how a Linux backup directory tree looks as created by backup utility bung's bu_rsync script +-- bin -> usr/bin +-- boot | +-- grub +-- _Changed and deleted files | +-- 2021 | +-- Jul | | +-- 01@17:45 | | | +-- opt | | | | +-- tomcat | | | +-- root | | | +-- var | | | +-- backups | | | +-- cache | | | +-- lib | | | +-- local | | | +-- log | | | +-- mail | | | +-- spool ... | | +-- 17@17:46 ... | | +-- 18@17:45 ... | +-- Jun ... | +-- 29@17:45 ... | +-- 30@17:45 ... +-- dev +-- etc ... A "rolling full" backup is great to restore from for small organisations which do not do enough restores to be well practised because the backup looks exactly like the source except for the additional "_Changed and deleted files" directory. Perfect point in time restores are not possible but adequate approximations (point in time but with the possibility of some extra files) can be done by restoring the last backup and then each of the changed and deleted files sets until the latest set after the desired point in time On 19/07/2021 17:30, rsync-requ...@lists.samba.org wrote: I would like some feedback about the --backup option in rsync. Is it worth using it for backups, or should I just use rsync commands that just transfer files without the use of --backup option? -b, --backup make backups (see --suffix & --backup-dir) --backup-dir=DIR make backups into hierarchy based in DIR --suffix=SUFFIX backup suffix (default ~ w/o --backup-dir) I am somewhat hesitant to use it because with the backup option, preexisting destination files are renamed as each file is transferred or deleted. It also says that previously backed-up files could get deleted. Thusly I need some assistance understanding all the pros and cons. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Utility of --backup
Correct, the --backup is almost never discussed. Have never used it, but as I have been looking at the documentation, I have started to wonder about its usefulness. From: Robin Lee Powell To: lisa-as...@perso.be Subject: Re: Utility of --backup Date: 19/07/2021 08:33:45 Europe/Paris Cc: rsync@lists.samba.org While this doesn't directly answer your question, you might find https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-incremental-backups-using-rsync-on-linux useful, depending on your actual goals. On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 07:50:34AM +0200, Lisa via rsync wrote: > I would like some feedback about the --backup option in rsync. Is > it worth using it for backups, or should I just use rsync > commands that just transfer files without the use of --backup > option? > > -b, --backup make backups (see --suffix & --backup-dir) > --backup-dir=DIR make backups into hierarchy based in DIR > --suffix=SUFFIX backup suffix (default ~ w/o --backup-dir) > > I am somewhat hesitant to use it because with the backup option, > preexisting destination files are renamed as each file is > transferred or deleted. It also says that previously backed-up > files could get deleted. Thusly I need some assistance > understanding all the pros and cons. > > > -- > Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. > To unsubscribe or change options: > https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync > Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Utility of --backup
I would like some feedback about the --backup option in rsync. Is it worth using it for backups, or should I just use rsync commands that just transfer files without the use of --backup option? -b, --backup make backups (see --suffix & --backup-dir) --backup-dir=DIR make backups into hierarchy based in DIR --suffix=SUFFIX backup suffix (default ~ w/o --backup-dir) I am somewhat hesitant to use it because with the backup option, preexisting destination files are renamed as each file is transferred or deleted. It also says that previously backed-up files could get deleted. Thusly I need some assistance understanding all the pros and cons. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
