Re: [Duplicity-talk] Restore single file from incremental, retrieving full

[Oliver Cole]

On 06/04/2018 11:52, Kenneth Loafman wrote:
> We're looking at an edge case here without enough info.  I have a thought.
>
> The way duplicity finds which volume to search for the restore file is 
> to look at the start path and ending path in the volume info in the 
> manifest.  So, if the test is something like:
>
> full backup has only the file 'foo', the range in the manifest will be 
> ['.'..'foo']
> inc backup has only the file 'bar', the range in the manifest will be 
> ['.'..'bar']
>
> So, when a recovery is requested, duplicity will download the full 
> volume because 'bar' is in the range.  Hmmm, no 'bar' there, so it will 
> download the inc volume, and there it is.
>
> Does that match your test case and observations?  If so, then duplicity 
> is working correctly.

I think it does match my test case. Would you mind confirming with my 
(lightly edited) manifests? (I'm aware the hostnames differ - I've just 
been testing this out in Docker). The --file-to-restore was example.pdf.


duplicity-full.20180401T141800Z.manifest
---
Hostname 460110c45ce2
Localdir /data
Volume 1:
    StartingPath   .
    EndingPath     example.mkv 3186
    Hash SHA1 c4bc29c33779e0369116008ba3b9e767435fa00e
Volume 2:
    StartingPath   example.mkv 3187
    EndingPath     example.mkv
    Hash SHA1 034022e2f997c09010852d009e8c69b0f4ce12b2
Filelist 1
    new      example.mkv


duplicity-inc.20180401T141800Z.to.20180404T193845Z.manifest
---
Hostname 332d275ac92e
Localdir /data
Volume 1:
    StartingPath   .
    EndingPath     example4.log
    Hash SHA1 40ed25b5c60c1112dd3d984767fdd64f67868d78
Filelist 5
    new      example.pdf
    new      example1.log
    new      example2.log
    new      example3.log
    new      example4.log


Can you explain a little more about why duplicity wouldn't look through 
all the manifests, find example.pdf absent from the full and present in 
the incremental for the first time, and not just download the 
incremental? I'm sure I'm just missing something in my understanding.

Thanks again,
Oli