Re: [markfasheh/duperemove] Why blocksize is limit to 1MB?

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

 



On 01/03/2017 08:24 PM, Peter Becker wrote:
> All invocations are justified, but not relevant in (offline) backup
> and archive scenarios.
> 
> For example you have multiple version of append-only log-files or
> append-only db-files (each more then 100GB in size), like this:
> 
>> Snapshot_01_01_2017
> -> file1.log .. 201 GB
> 
>> Snapshot_02_01_2017
> -> file1.log .. 205 GB
> 
>> Snapshot_03_01_2017
> -> file1.log .. 221 GB
> 
> The first 201 GB would be every time the same.
> Files a copied at night from windows, linux or bsd systems and
> snapshoted after copy.

XY problem?

Why not use rsync --inplace in combination with btrfs snapshots? Even if
the remote does not support rsync and you need to pull the full file
first, you could again use rsync locally.

-- 
Hans van Kranenburg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux