[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Duplicity-talk] Progress feedback
From: |
Michael Terry |
Subject: |
[Duplicity-talk] Progress feedback |
Date: |
Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:34:34 -0500 |
Now that machine-readable logging landed (thanks Ken!), I'd like to
turn my attention to machine-readable progress feedback.
I propose a two-fold approach:
1) Add periodic level 5 verbosity NOTICEs that say something like
"Processed 5M of files". The machine-readable version would look
like:
NOTICE 2 5000\n
. Processed 5M of files\n
\n
The interesting difference there is the extra argument after the
message id. It's a machine-readable version of the info in the
human-readable message.
The count would be against un-compressed size (i.e. on-disk size).
That would work for backing up. When restoring, the situation is
reversed. Duplicity must know how many volumes are on the other side.
It could send notices like:
NOTICE 3 5000 1400\n
. . Processed 5M of 14M\n
\n
Because duplicity knows total and current count on restore.
2) Add a --dry-run option. This would do normal activity, except
wouldn't tar/send data. It would still emit the above notices.
When backing up, --dry-run and progress NOTICEs would allow a frontend
to first run duplicity with --dry-run and then know the total size of
processed files. It would then run duplicity a second time without
--dry-run to do the actual backup.
It would be nice if the when backing up, duplicity could give us a
total, and we wouldn't have to do --dry-run, but I suppose it's not
worth it for duplicity to scan first itself just for the purpose of
getting a total count.
How does the above sound? I'll code it, but I'm curious what Ken and
others have to say about the above design.
-mt
- [Duplicity-talk] Progress feedback,
Michael Terry <=