2011/7/11 Ed Blackman
<address@hidden>
I'm not familiar with the internals of duplicity, but is it possible to rebase an incremental chain?
...
This would come at the cost of X+1 incrementals being bigger than they are now, since they would, in effect, roll up all the changes from the previous incrementals into one delta. But my guess is that in most use cases it would be significantly smaller than a full backup.
Again, I have no idea if this is feasible, but I thought it might be a good idea for discussion.
i like this idea.
i think (and someone please correct me) the biggest problem will be deciding upon a naming convention. duplicity backups already follow a specific naming scheme to determine which volumes belong to which backup sets. this addition might complicate things in ways that would affect backwards compatibility. perhaps hard links or symbolic links to the master full backup sets (or i suppose just the sigtar) could be made with the name of the 'rebased' incremental chain, although i suppose not all backends could support hard links or even symbolic links.
jj