pseudo incremental backup solution

[Nico Schottelius]

Martin Schröder [Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 01:21:02PM +0200]:
> 2006/10/20, Nico Schottelius <nico-rsync at schottelius.org>:
> >The configuration parameters have to be TAB seperated (using standard
> >whitespaces breaks).
> 
> Cosmetics. :-)

Well, it's a bit problematic if you've all your editors switched
to replaced tabs by $count_of_whitespaces.

And I personally see no reason why to enforce using tabs on users.

But yes, this maybe a design issues, if rsnapshot wants to be able
to backup files beginning with a whitespace.

> >Additionally rsync does not support per source pre or post execution
> >of programs (for mounting, dumping databases, ...).
> 
> You can set cmd_preexec, cmd_postexec globally or per backup.

Well, I personally consider this a hack. Perhaps introducing

backup  /var/  dream/  exclude=/var/tmp prexec=/path/to/script postexec=/path/to/script

would fit into the configuration file design better.


> >For large scale backup solution you need parallel execution, which
> >ccollect is capable of, but rsnapshot not.
> 
> This should be possible with the latest rsnapshot (using sync/sync
> first) and multiple incarnations of rsnapshot, but it's not in there
> automatically.

Same as above.

I do not say it's not possible with rsnapshot, you can hack
everything to fit to your needs.

But I say that it is easier with ccollect.

> >I didn't look into rsnapshot code for a long time, but the last
> >time they used 'cp -al' for cloning, if gnu cp was available.
> >This is not necessary because of rsync's --link-dest parameter.
> 
> rsnapshot does this now. :-)

Ah, nice!

Btw, Frederic is currently working on a configuration utility
for ccollect called ccollect-config [0].

I am highly interested on your opinion of cconfig, because
there are several reason I choosed that configuration style
and I would like to know whether someone shares my point of
view or for which reason you would not like to use it
or prefer xml, ini-style, sh-style or even rsnapshot style.

Imho, automatically editing is much easier with cconfig and
using the filesystem as what it was designed for, as a database,
is much cleaner then some other configuration ideas (thus abstracting
the database).

Sincerly

Nico


[0]: http://0xf00.de/ccollect-config.html

-- 
``...if there's one thing about Linux users, they're do-ers, not whiners.''
(A quotation of Andy Patrizio I completely agree with)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/attachments/20061020/797e0db8/attachment.bin