Re: [rdiff-backup-users] why does exclude move files to increments?

[David]

> Sorry, rdiff-backup is quite slow in my opinion (I have a similar
> problem). I think it's inefficient in marshaling data to send over the
> network. I've worked around it by rsyncing my data to the backup server
> and running rdiff-backup locally there, but that may not work for you,
> especially if you don't want two copies of your data on the backup server.

I have a similar setup to this, where I use rsync for data transfer,
but rdiff-backup on the server for reverse increments. One reason is
because I can install DeltaCopy as a windows-based rsync service,
rather than relying on SMB (sucks for getting updates to large files,
eg Outlook mail databases)

What I do is:

1) On the server: rsync from the main backup dir to a temp dir (with
an option to create hardlinks instead of copying files)

2) Rsync from the source host to the temp dir

3) Run rdiff-backup to push changes from the temp dir over to the main
backup dir. (I use an rdiff-backup option to ignore inode changes).

4) Remove the temporary directory.

Any comments on this approach?