Denis' answer is very good, I won't re-iterate his points. On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 01:26:48PM +0200, Veljko wrote: > Thanks for your valuable input. So, in case I have to backup lot of > small files and only some of them are changed I should go with > rsnapshot. If there are big text files that changes through time, I > should go with rdiff-backup.
Actually, lots and lots of small files is the worst use-case for rsnapshot, and the reason I believe it should be avoided. It creates large hard-link trees and with lots and lots of small files, the filesystem metadata for the trees can consume more space than the files themselves. Also performing operations that need to recurse over large link trees (such as simply removing an old increment) can be very slow in that case. > Would it be reasonable to use them both where appropriate or thats just > unnecessary complexity? Sounds like unnecessary complexity to me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120911152922.GA2125@debian
