|
From: | Charles Duffy |
Subject: | Re: [rdiff-backup-users] rdiff-backup reliability ad lzop compression |
Date: | Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:12:43 -0600 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 1.4 (Windows/20050908) |
roland wrote:
Speaking as a user, rdiff-backup isn't perfect -- it has bugs, to be sure -- but none of the issues we've seen impact data integrity. Our internal QA team has given it their approval, and we're using it for data for which lawsuits could (and quite likely would!) be spawned were it lost.first i'd be happy to know, how "reliable" rdiff-backup is in general.
The rdiff algorithm implies random access -- if you're going to rewrite just one block, you don't want to recompress the whole file. Also, some users (me!) consider having the data be in original form on the backup server a substantial convenience -- so even if the above issue didn't apply, we'd still want this feature to be optional.regarding diskspace, there is one idea coming to my mind:what about storing _all_ of the backup data compressed and adding a layer of "realtime compression/decompression" - i.e. instead of only gzipping the data in rdiff-backup-data subdir, why not compressing the data in "destination_directory", too ?
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |