[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Duplicity-talk] Seeding a remote backup

From: edgar . soldin
Subject: Re: [Duplicity-talk] Seeding a remote backup
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:48:48 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120604 Thunderbird/13.0

On 13.06.2012 19:42, T.J. Crowder wrote:
> On 13 June 2012 18:23, <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
>     On 13.06.2012 19:03, T.J. Crowder wrote:be aware that duplicity works 
> perfectly for smaller backup sizes, but was never developed to backup 
> terrabytes, so you might stumble along the way.
>     also. it is suggested to do fulls regularly because a bitflip/error in 
> one volume essentially makes the backup chain defective from that point in 
> time on.
> Thanks, good to know. I seem to remember that issue with volumes could be 
> mitigated by segmenting (partitioning) my backups, something like that...
> Since doing the full is a very expensive operation for me (literally), it 
> sounds like maybe I should look at going another way...although what way that 
> is, I'm not sure.

the current suggested workaround to the "do fulls regularly" is to simply move 
incrementals (e.g. every two weeks) based on a full into a subfolder and do new 
incrementals. this of course gets more expensive speaking bandwidth as the 
changes compared to the full accumulate over time.

for restoring of a specific older time you will of course have to manually move 
incrementals back and move the recent incrementals into another subfolder and 
vice versa.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]