Re: [Duplicity-talk] are periodic full backups necessary?

[Kenneth Loafman]

Adam Megacz wrote:
> I'm trying to get a good understanding of the tradeoffs between
> rdiff-backup and duplicity.  One of the nice things about rdiff-backup
> is that the "most recent and backward diffs" means you never need to
> do a "full backup".

I'm not sure what you mean by "most recent and backward diffs".  Is that
the same as a differential backup?  Or is it the same as an incremental
based on the previous full backup?

> What are the consequences of never doing a full backup with
> duplicity's "original and forward diffs" format?  Will the time
> required for an incremental backup increase in proportion to how many
> incrementals there have been since the last full backup?  Or is the
> backup time independent of how "far back" the most recent full backup
> was?

The consequences, as Peter pointed out, are increased recovery times.  A
full backup is quick to recover since its only one pass.  A differential
(not implemented) only requires two passes, recover full and recover the
last differential.  An incremental backup requires that you recover the
full backup, then apply each incremental.

...Ken

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature