Re: [Duplicity-talk] Redundancy?

[Mikołaj Czyż]

But having one extra volume as a XOR result seems (naively) like not so complicated idea, doesn't it?

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Lluís Batlle i Rossell <address@hidden> wrote:

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 06:43:47PM +0200, Mikołaj Czyż wrote:
> Thanks. But as duplicity uses checksums extensively, etc. why not add some
> level of redundancy?
> (on the other hand I believe there must be good reasons not to implement it
> if it is still not there)

In fact I don't use duplicity much; I use mainly a program I wrote, 'btar', and
there I added at least one block of redundancy with XOR. :)

More redundancy is a bit more complicated (requiring lots of memory).

> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Lluís Batlle i Rossell <address@hidden>wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 06:35:13PM +0200, Mikołaj Czyż wrote:
> > > Are there any works on adding some form of archive redundancy to
> > duplicity?
> > >
> > > If I understand correctly one bit-flip can destroy the whole duplicity
> > > backup, am I right?
> >
> > It will destroy one file of the backup, I think. The backup has multiple
> > files.
> >
> > It will require hand work, but it's not that the whole backup will
> > disappear,
> > iiuc.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Duplicity-talk mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk
> >

> _______________________________________________
> Duplicity-talk mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk


_______________________________________________
Duplicity-talk mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk