Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
> From: markw at mohawksoft.com [mailto:markw at mohawksoft.com] > Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2011 2:48 PM > > I will argue that an rsync will NEVER be more effective unless you > actively wipe the blocks where a file once existed. for (( i=0 ; i<200 ; i++ )) ; do mkdir temp cp datafile temp run_test $i >> testresults.txt rm -rf temp done In this case, rsync is what you want, because it ignores files that don't exist. But a block level backup will backup all the blocks that were ever contained in any of the (now removed) copies of the datafile. I don't know what users you support, but I support engineers who run this type of test all the time. They create test work dirs, they perform volatile work in there, store the results of the test, and remove their scratch dir. The block level backup you're talking about is great, under the assumption that you basically just add data to a filesystem. It's terrible when you add & remove data from the filesystem. I stand by my claim: Important to know if it's suitable for your purposes, whoever you are, the consumer who might consider using this.
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |