Re: [Duplicity-talk] Having to specify incrementals

[edgar . soldin]

On 04.04.2013 17:16, Elvar wrote:
> 
> On 3/29/2013 5:29 PM, address@hidden wrote:
>> On 29.03.2013 22:24, Elvar wrote:
>>> On 3/29/2013 1:59 PM, address@hidden wrote:
>>>> On 29.03.2013 19:35, Elvar wrote:
>>>>> On 3/29/2013 11:49 AM, address@hidden wrote:
>>>>>> On 29.03.2013 17:31, Elvar wrote:
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I recently started using Duplicity to perform offsite backups for a 
>>>>>>> linux server of ours. When I performed  a simulated disaster recovery 
>>>>>>> scenario I found that the only data I had been able restore was data 
>>>>>>> from the initial full backup. It doesn't appear that Duplicity was 
>>>>>>> automatically doing incrementals despite the data growing. Below is the 
>>>>>>> command I'm using...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FTP_PASSWORD='somepass' PASSPHRASE='somepass' duplicity /mnt 
>>>>>>> ftps://address@hidden
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Shouldn't that automatically assume incrementals if the full had 
>>>>>>> already been done?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> yes. what's the output of collection-status?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ..ede/duply.net
>>>>> After having manually ran an incremental or two, here is the current 
>>>>> status.
>>>>>
>>>>> Import of duplicity.backends.giobackend Failed: No module named gio
>>>>> Import of duplicity.backends.sshbackend Failed: No module named paramiko
>>>>> LFTP version is 4.3.3
>>>>> Local and Remote metadata are synchronized, no sync needed.
>>>>> Last full backup date: Thu Mar 28 17:03:26 2013
>>>>> Collection Status
>>>>> -----------------
>>>>> Connecting with backend: FTPSBackend
>>>>> Archive dir: /root/.cache/duplicity/cb471964ea71f51bdbff729d2a8e763e
>>>>>
>>>>> Found 0 secondary backup chains.
>>>>>
>>>>> Found primary backup chain with matching signature chain:
>>>>> -------------------------
>>>>> Chain start time: Thu Mar 28 17:03:26 2013
>>>>> Chain end time: Fri Mar 29 11:23:11 2013
>>>>> Number of contained backup sets: 6
>>>>> Total number of contained volumes: 61
>>>>>    Type of backup set:                            Time:      Num volumes:
>>>>>                   Full         Thu Mar 28 17:03:26 2013 50
>>>>>            Incremental         Thu Mar 28 19:24:47 2013                 1
>>>>>            Incremental         Fri Mar 29 09:23:59 2013                 1
>>>>>            Incremental         Fri Mar 29 09:33:08 2013                 1
>>>>>            Incremental         Fri Mar 29 10:12:58 2013                 1
>>>>>            Incremental         Fri Mar 29 11:23:11 2013                 7
>>>>> -------------------------
>>>>> No orphaned or incomplete backup sets found.
>>>>>
>>>> dunno what your complaining about. it clearly states
>>>>
>>>> 1 x full
>>>> 5 x incrementals
>>>>
>>>> run again without forced incremental and see if it adds full or incr.
>>>>
>>>> ..ede
>>>>
>>>>
>>> So I just ran it again and I see it says "NewFiles 0" and "NewFileSize 0". 
>>> The content I'm backing up is an email archive that uses Maildir format for 
>>> storage. I know for certain several hundred emails or more have landed in 
>>> this archive since my last incremental yet this last job doesn't seem to 
>>> see it. So, my question is, why isn't the incremental job grabbing the 
>>> latest data?
>>>
>>> Import of duplicity.backends.giobackend Failed: No module named gio
>>> Import of duplicity.backends.sshbackend Failed: No module named paramiko
>>> LFTP version is 4.3.3
>>> Local and Remote metadata are synchronized, no sync needed.
>>> Last full backup date: Thu Mar 28 17:03:26 2013
>>> --------------[ Backup Statistics ]--------------
>>> StartTime 1364591400.73 (Fri Mar 29 16:10:00 2013)
>>> EndTime 1364591418.34 (Fri Mar 29 16:10:18 2013)
>>> ElapsedTime 17.62 (17.62 seconds)
>>> SourceFiles 29069
>>> SourceFileSize 2409332518 (2.24 GB)
>>> NewFiles 0
>>> NewFileSize 0 (0 bytes)
>>> DeletedFiles 0
>>> ChangedFiles 0
>>> ChangedFileSize 0 (0 bytes)
>>> ChangedDeltaSize 0 (0 bytes)
>>> DeltaEntries 0
>>> RawDeltaSize 0 (0 bytes)
>>> TotalDestinationSizeChange 103 (103 bytes)
>>> Errors 0
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>
>> what happened to your first issue? is that solved?
>>
>> wrt. 0byte change . this can happen when software does not update timestamps 
>> correctly. but i doubt that's the case here.
>> how about simply restoring the latest archive and binary compare it to the 
>> current state? after that run 'verify' and see if that says there is one.
>>
>> ..ede/duply.net
>>
>>
> 
> Ok, I think I may have figured out the issue. When I was running the 
> Duplicity backups initially I was doing it on a read only iscsi mounted 
> volume. I noticed if I mounted without read-only I didn't have the same issue 
> with it not backing up newer data. Is this expected behavior?
> 

no, please check if timestamps are correctly changing when the iscsi device is 
mounted read only.

ede/duply.net