-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Does anybody have evidence or belief that the "probabalistic" part of the '--quick' optoin (as of ZODB 3.2.8, if it matters) is likely to guess wrong on a setup where incremental backups are run frequently?
The installation in question has a moderately large filestorage (40 Gb or so) and would like to put the backup target on a SAN, but the cost to figure out whether to do an incremental or not is higher than doing the full backup, due to the extra I/O overhead of the standard, "slow" method. Before I hack the backup script up to do the incrementals against a local directlry, I'd like to know that the '-Q' option would or wouldn't be a viable choice. Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFI+5xt+gerLs4ltQ4RAsXxAJ9obJPdK2SnTvF2rfY+9Q+VI1belQCgkkwF TnfpBF5B+N1ucUxcqzDEikM= =kFzL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki: http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/ ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev