Re: [Duplicity-talk] Having to specify incrementals

[edgar . soldin]

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