Re: [Duplicity-talk] Rollup Functionality and Parity?

[Colin Ryan]

> Done locally would still require some programming on the duplicity side,
> but it would indeed be possible to take the current full, merge in all
> the incrementals and build a new full.  This would be equivalent to
> doing a new full and would not have any advantage that I can see.
>
>   
I was proposing that the "locally" in this case would be local to the 
duplicity backend i.e. the remote system to which duplicity is sending 
data, so the advantage in theory would be that fulls are being generated 
local to the repository and don't need to be sent over the slow Internet 
wire from the source of the files.

> Most files are not changed between full backups.  The incremental could
> be rolled up a lot faster, leaving only the last full and the rolled up
> incremental.
>   

Ahh that is an interesting thought.

Thanks for your feedback Ken.
> ...Ken
>
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Duplicity-talk mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk
>