[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Duplicity-talk] inc backup if nothing changed
From: |
edgar . soldin |
Subject: |
Re: [Duplicity-talk] inc backup if nothing changed |
Date: |
Fri, 21 Jul 2023 23:58:11 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0 |
On 21.07.2023 23:29, Thomas via Duplicity-talk wrote:
Hi,
I want to re-raise a question that wasn't finally answered in
https://bugs.launchpad.net/duplicity/+bug/768481.
I have the same use case as described in the bug above.
In my case I running a backup of my photo collection (folder structured by
year). I am running one duplicity backup per year. By nature former years
changing rarely, but they my change if I revisit some photos and add tags etc.
Therefore I want to make sure all changes get into a backup regularly (weekly).
As described even if nothing has changed in a folder a incremental backup is
created and a few bytes are stored.
I am unsure about the logic in duplicity. Why is there a small sigtar even if
nothing has been changed?
The workaround to do a --dry-run and check for changes may work, but it
requires a 2nd run though the filesystem if there are changes to do the backup.
With thousands of files and hundreds of GB per year, this is not a lightweight
job.
It would be great if this can be avoided.
Is there any technical reason why this incremental back need to get pushed even
if not files was changed?
What impact could have an option like "--skip-empty-backup"?
hey Thomas,
quick answer is - simply the use case was obviously never considered. duplicity
is just stupidendously doing it's job and running through the hoops. if
somebody would contribute the changes for a `--skip-empty-backup` it'll surely
be appreciated :)
sunny regards.. ede/duply.net