[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: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:02:57 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120604 Thunderbird/13.0

On 14.06.2012 16:55, Andrew Kohlsmith (mailing lists account) wrote:
> On 2012-06-13, at 1:48 PM, address@hidden wrote:
>> 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.
> I've been running duplicity for a couple of years now. I create 650MB backup 
> files and do incrementals for 13 weeks. I'm not sure how big the largest 
> backup set is, but it does take forever to upload on a normal cable 
> connection. :-/
>> 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.
> I thought in order to restore to a specific point-in-time you needed the full 
> plus all incrementals from that full to the point you want to restore. I 
> don't think it's possible to use a more recent full backup with older 
> incrementals.

that's not what i suggested:

meant was do new incrementals against the old full to effectively shorten the 
chain artificially hence minimizing the chance of having a defect volume 
killing backups after it.

anyway, this is a workaround and no solution of course. also it does not 
protect you from the full getting corrupted, so you additionally need that as a 
copy in a safe place.


reply via email to

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