On 2012-01-16 4:37 PM, Kevin Korb wrote:
As far as rsync is concerned an NFS mount is neither push or pull.
Oh baloney... it is pushing a backup from a local system to a remote system.
--
Best regards,
Charles
--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list.
To u
As an aside and of possible value to others that want a push (over
ssh) backup system that's comparable to rsnapshot, I wrote my own:
http://www.trunkfi.sh
Cheers!
> Q: Can I set the snapshot_root to a remote SSH path? I want to push
> my backups to a remote server, rather than pull them fr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
As far as rsync is concerned an NFS mount is neither push or pull. It
is simply a local copy with one path probably being a lot slower than
the other. Doing a local copy also means that you are stuck with
- --whole-file.
On 01/16/12 16:20, Charles M
On 2012-01-16 4:06 PM, Kevin Korb wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- From http://rsnapshot.org/faq.html:
Q: Can I set the snapshot_root to a remote SSH path?
The OP didn't specify over SSH (... I'm doing this to an NFS mount) -
that came into the picture later from other
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- From http://rsnapshot.org/faq.html:
Q: Can I set the snapshot_root to a remote SSH path? I want to push
my backups to a remote server, rather than pull them from a remote server.
A:
Rsnapshot does not support a remote snapshot root via S
On 2012-01-16 3:03 PM, Kevin Korb wrote:
On 01/16/12 09:55, L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, Satish Shukla wrote:
b) pulling the data from source to destination ( i.e.
running rsync from destination machine)
The main reason to pull is with hard linking of the saved files,
e
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Actually, rsync is completely capable of doing hard links
(--link-dest) in push or pull mode. It is rsnapshot that artificially
imposes that limitation to rsync.
On 01/16/12 09:55, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, Satish Shukla wrote:
>
>
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, Satish Shukla wrote:
> b) pulling the data from source to destination ( i.e. running
> rsync from destination machine)
>
The main reason to pull is with hard linking of the saved files, e.g.
rsnapshot - only possible with a pull operation. Security is also a little
bet
Hi,
I am trying to gain understanding about which of the two methodologies for
rsync operation is better . I don’t have statistical information if there is
any performance difference for the same set of data. I also want to build some
kind of error handling/control to notify users for failures
