On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 05:53:32 -0500, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 11:25:26 -0500, Warp wrote:
> 
>> > The most typical backup program for other systems is something that
>> > you have to run manually, and most often than not with a horrible
>> > nightmare of a user interface. (For example you wouldn't believe how
>> > complicated it is to restore one single file with OpenSuse's system
>> > backup utility.
>> > Something that takes like 5 seconds with Time Machine can take at
>> > minimum 5 minutes with OpenSuse's system backup, often more. And of
>> > course it's in no way automatic.)
> 
>> rsync + cron = backup goodness.
> 
> I don't think rsync does incremental backups. In other words, if you
> wanted to restore an earlier version of a file, it's not possible.

There are ways to accomplish that, sure.

The search I suggested to Andy, for example, has a couple of examples of 
how to do exactly that.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:

>
> The problem with this is that it's easy to forget or to just be lazy and
> procrastinate (until the day that your HD breaks.)
>

Yeah, very true. I certainly don't back-up as often as I should. My basic
philosophy is to 'believe' in the MTBF specs of modern hard drives (probably a
mis-placed belief!) But I generate so *little* data during the week (even
usually during a month) that I don't worry too much about a loss of 'important'
data. (Except POV-Ray files!!) I do need to be more vigilant, though.

Post a reply to this message

>> I don't think rsync does incremental backups. In other words, if you
>> wanted to restore an earlier version of a file, it's not possible.
>>
> If you want to keep track of various version of a file, you need a
> revision control system (and then backup the repository), such as
> (<start holy war>): mercurial, cvs, rcs, svn, git, ...
> ( holy wars never stop, no end tag)

 From what I've seen, several revision control systems *claim* to 
support large binary files, but barf if you actually try it...

There are plenty of other ways to achieve this though. E.g., find all 
the files with the "archive bit" set, dump them into a dated folder, 
reset the archive bit on all the files you just copied. (That's why this 
file attribute exists in the first place, after all...)

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 17:16:16 +0000, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>>> I don't think rsync does incremental backups. In other words, if you
>>> wanted to restore an earlier version of a file, it's not possible.
>>>
>> If you want to keep track of various version of a file, you need a
>> revision control system (and then backup the repository), such as
>> (<start holy war>): mercurial, cvs, rcs, svn, git, ...
>> ( holy wars never stop, no end tag)
> 
>  From what I've seen, several revision control systems *claim* to
> support large binary files, but barf if you actually try it...

subversion seems to handle them fine, FWIW.  I've seen it used to handle 
multiple revisions of multiple-gigabyte vmdk files without a problem.  
It's not terribly efficient at non-text files (it doesn't diff them, it 
just stores each revision of the entire file).

I've also seen it used for binary FrameMaker files extensively, and it 
versions those fine as well (though with the same caveat).

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Le 27/01/2013 23:28, Jim Henderson a écrit :
>>  From what I've seen, several revision control systems *claim* to
>> support large binary files, but barf if you actually try it...
> 
> subversion seems to handle them fine, FWIW.  I've seen it used to handle 
> multiple revisions of multiple-gigabyte vmdk files without a problem.  
> It's not terribly efficient at non-text files (it doesn't diff them, it 
> just stores each revision of the entire file).
> 
> I've also seen it used for binary FrameMaker files extensively, and it 
> versions those fine as well (though with the same caveat).

Yes, svn is fine... as long as no-one activate the keywords substitution
on the binary file (and a binary file can be a word document) (and hell
opens with keywords set on, when Murphy put a $Rev$ or similar in the
binary)

Post a reply to this message

> rsync + cron = backup goodness.

Or robocopy + task scheduler if you're on windows. But both options 
assume your computer is on and the backup medium is connected...

Post a reply to this message

>  From what I've seen, several revision control systems *claim* to
> support large binary files, but barf if you actually try it...

I don't know how our IT department at work manage it, but on all our 
network drives you can right click and folder or file in Explorer and go 
Properties->"Previous versions" and help yourself to whatever previous 
version you want. I assume that all gets backed up somehow.

Post a reply to this message

On 28/01/2013 08:12 AM, scott wrote:
>> From what I've seen, several revision control systems *claim* to
>> support large binary files, but barf if you actually try it...
>
> I don't know how our IT department at work manage it, but on all our
> network drives you can right click and folder or file in Explorer and go
> Properties->"Previous versions" and help yourself to whatever previous
> version you want. I assume that all gets backed up somehow.

It's a new feature in Windows Server 2007 (?). AFAIK, it's only 
available for the server edition of the OS. But yes, basically it 
retains old versions of files for X days. The files are still on the 
same physical volume, however. This protects against logical failures 
(e.g., some doofus deleted the wrong file), but not against physical 
failures such as a head crash.

Of course, then you need to buy backup software expensive enough that it 
backs up the hidden previous versions as well as the visible files...

Post a reply to this message

On 28/01/2013 08:10 AM, scott wrote:
> Or robocopy + task scheduler if you're on windows.

Fun fact: I actually did this at my last employer. For real. They 
wouldn't cough up the money for a real backup solution...

Post a reply to this message

Le 2013-01-28 03:42, Orchid Win7 v1 a écrit :
> On 28/01/2013 08:12 AM, scott wrote:
>>> From what I've seen, several revision control systems *claim* to
>>> support large binary files, but barf if you actually try it...
>>
>> I don't know how our IT department at work manage it, but on all our
>> network drives you can right click and folder or file in Explorer and go
>> Properties->"Previous versions" and help yourself to whatever previous
>> version you want. I assume that all gets backed up somehow.
>
> It's a new feature in Windows Server 2007 (?).

A new feature that Novell had in Netware 3.10 back in 1990.

> Of course, then you need to buy backup software expensive enough that it
> backs up the hidden previous versions as well as the visible files...

No.  You just need to load $Day's tape (or DVD) with $day's version of 
the file.

Presumably, your backup software's DB will be able to provide you with $Day.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message