[rdiff-backup-users] Suggested fs for placing rdiff-backup data stores

[Alex Samad]

Hi 

thought I would break this off the original thread

just to give you some example info on fusecompress datastore

max:/backups/nas/system/boot# du --apparent-size -s --si *   
1.3M    System.map-2.6.26-1-amd64
1.6M    System.map-2.6.30-2-amd64
1.6M    System.map-2.6.31-1-amd64
86k     config-2.6.26-1-amd64
99k     config-2.6.30-2-amd64
102k    config-2.6.31-1-amd64
4.0M    grub
8.4M    initrd.img-2.6.26-1-amd64
7.8M    initrd.img-2.6.26-1-amd64.bak
9.8M    initrd.img-2.6.30-2-amd64
9.8M    initrd.img-2.6.30-2-amd64.bak
11M     initrd.img-2.6.31-1-amd64
11M     initrd.img-2.6.31-1-amd64.bak
1.8M    vmlinuz-2.6.26-1-amd64
2.3M    vmlinuz-2.6.30-2-amd64
2.5M    vmlinuz-2.6.31-1-amd64
max:/backups/nas/system/boot# du  -s --si *
238k    System.map-2.6.26-1-amd64
291k    System.map-2.6.30-2-amd64
308k    System.map-2.6.31-1-amd64
25k     config-2.6.26-1-amd64
25k     config-2.6.30-2-amd64
25k     config-2.6.31-1-amd64
1.8M    grub
8.4M    initrd.img-2.6.26-1-amd64
7.8M    initrd.img-2.6.26-1-amd64.bak
9.8M    initrd.img-2.6.30-2-amd64
9.8M    initrd.img-2.6.30-2-amd64.bak
11M     initrd.img-2.6.31-1-amd64
11M     initrd.img-2.6.31-1-amd64.bak
1.8M    vmlinuz-2.6.26-1-amd64
2.3M    vmlinuz-2.6.30-2-amd64
2.5M    vmlinuz-2.6.31-1-amd64

so my primary partition is /backups/.nas and then fuse mounts to /backups/nas/  
this is looking at /boot directory for an example. Overall using du I have 1.3 
compressed compared to 3.1 uncompressed 


du --apparent-size -s --si .nas nas
1.3G    .nas
3.1G    nas

du  -s --si .nas nas
1.6G    .nas
1.6G    nas


Alex


On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 07:45:25AM +1100, Alex Samad wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 03:05:14PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 06:44:46AM +1100, Alex Samad wrote:
> > > > I'm experimenting with LessFS. It's another fuse-based filesystem, and 
> > > > in
> > > > addition to compressing blocks, it checksums each block and only stores
> > > > identical blocks once -- "de-duplication". This seems like a particular 
> > > > win
> > > > with rdiff-backup, because of the problem with handling of renamed 
> > > > files.
> > > thats nice.... what compression tec does it use
> > 
> > Read about it yourself here: http://www.lessfs.com/wordpress/?page_id=50
> > 
> > In short, it uses a 192-bit hash function (happens to be Tiger) to uniquely
> > identify each block, and then compresses each block with LZO or QUICKLZ.
> 
> had a quick read of the web site, just wondering how effective it would
> be with something like rdiff-backup - my line of thinking is that rd
> stores the differences, so I would guess all the original files would
> benefit, but the differences wouldn't
> 
> Also with fusecompress you can specify by mime type which files pass
> through ie don't get affected by fusecompress.
> 
> I will have to investigate a bit more, run some tests
> > 
>

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature