Re: evaluating backup systems: rsync

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Gordon Messmer <yinyang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 01/18/2013 01:59 AM, M. Fioretti wrote:
>> even if all the "rsyncing" needed would be something equivalent to "mv
>> holidays_2013 family_holidays_2013" on the remote server. Is it
>> possible to tell rsync to behave in that way?
>
> No, which is why some people use Mercurial or git to keep data in sync
> in multiple places.  It's not very space efficient, but can be more
> network efficient than rsync in transferring changes and renames.

I think an incremental 'dump' can catch renames.   zfs's incremental
send/receive would track just the changed disk blocks.  Not sure what
else would handle it better.   Backuppc would transfer a new copy but
if you were keeping more than one backup the matching files would end
up being stored as links to each other and not take additional space.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux