Re: [Duplicity-talk] long term incrementals and scalability question

[edgar . soldin]

On 16.04.2013 18:05, Elvar wrote:
> 
> I am currently using Duplicity to make backups of a fast growing email 
> archive solution. I have Duplicity backing the data up via FTP to an offsite 
> server. I performed the initial full backup and have been doing incrementals 
> since. I'm using 250M volumes to try and cut down on the number of files on 
> the remote server. The question I have is, is this a viable long term method 
> I'm using? Performing semi routine full backups is not an option due to how 
> long they take and the amount of data that has to be transferred.
> 

no. currently when one signature/volume becomes corrupt all following backups 
become unusable as well. so you either

1. have to do full on a regular schedule
or
2. doing new backups against an old full by moving incrementals manually 
somewhere else on the backend (and back if you want to restore a backup 
contained in them). NOTE: this is a hack and not advised, but the only way 
currently to "rebase" incrementals.

also, in #2 you'd assume that your full will never get corrupted, which is 
probably not very clever either.

..ede/duply.net