Remote rsync question

[Jamon Camisso]

On 05/08/2014 10:44 AM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 12:02:19AM -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
>>   Not using --delete has saved me a few times when I accidentally
>> deleted stuff I didn't mean to, and realized it a few weeks later.  I
>> weed out cruft manually.  And with 2 terabyte drives, I can keep old
>> stuff around.
> 
> rsnapshot is handy for backups since it keeps hardlinked trees for
> different runs and still does the actual transfer with rsync.  That way
> you can keep old versions of files with only the cost in space of the
> changed files.  Very nice tool.

I use rsnapshot on top of a ZFS on Linux backed storage system (used to
be OpenIndiana but ZFS on Linux works well now).

After a year+ of backups on this one it's at 1.83x dedup ratio with 1.5x
data compression across ~1000GB worth of data. Only 543GB is allocated
on the disk even though there's 1TB worth of actual files.

With rsnapshot's hard links there's only a small data transfer overhead
for changed files.

The two together give a very granular and compact point in time recovery
image of file systems without resorting to LVM snapshots and stuff. For
my systems' use case it's more than good enough.

Cheers, Jamon
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists