From matthias.veth at schmetterling.de Fri Feb 3 09:53:57 2012 From: matthias.veth at schmetterling.de (Matthias Veth) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:53:57 +0000 Subject: [Dirvish] dirvish-runall before dirvish-expire Message-ID: Hello, is there a problem if i modify /etc/dirvish/dirvish-cronjob so that this script first runs dirvish-runall and then dirvish-expire? I would would change: /usr/sbin/dirvish-expire --quiet && /usr/sbin/dirvish-runall --quiet To /usr/sbin/dirvish-runall --quiet && /usr/sbin/dirvish-expire --quiet Do you know if there is anything which speaks against this? Best regards, Matthias -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.dirvish.org/pipermail/dirvish/attachments/20120203/1e257d42/attachment.html From paul at debian.org Fri Feb 3 10:25:19 2012 From: paul at debian.org (Paul Slootman) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 11:25:19 +0100 Subject: [Dirvish] dirvish-runall before dirvish-expire In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20120203102519.GB22482@msgid.wurtel.net> On Fri 03 Feb 2012, Matthias Veth wrote: > is there a problem if i modify /etc/dirvish/dirvish-cronjob so that this script first runs dirvish-runall and then dirvish-expire? > I would would change: > /usr/sbin/dirvish-expire --quiet && /usr/sbin/dirvish-runall --quiet > To > /usr/sbin/dirvish-runall --quiet && /usr/sbin/dirvish-expire --quiet > > Do you know if there is anything which speaks against this? The reason for the current arrangement is that you first free up space by removing expired images before making the new images. If you have sufficient space then there's no problem :) I'm wondering whether the && should be replaced by a simple semicolon; if the expire fails for whatever reason, then I would still like dirvish to try and make new backups. In your case, with && if runall fails, you won't remove any old images, which is bad if the reason for the failure was insufficient space :-) (I don't know whether failures in individual image backups get passed on through dirvish-runall, I haven't checked the code.) Paul From dhoworth at mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk Fri Feb 3 10:12:15 2012 From: dhoworth at mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk (Dave Howorth) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 10:12:15 +0000 Subject: [Dirvish] dirvish-runall before dirvish-expire In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4F2BB2FF.80102@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk> Matthias Veth wrote: > Hello, > is there a problem if i modify /etc/dirvish/dirvish-cronjob so that this script first runs dirvish-runall and then dirvish-expire? > I would would change: > /usr/sbin/dirvish-expire --quiet && /usr/sbin/dirvish-runall --quiet > To > /usr/sbin/dirvish-runall --quiet && /usr/sbin/dirvish-expire --quiet > > Do you know if there is anything which speaks against this? I don't believe there's any fundamental problem. The obvious reason that its done the way it is, is that it uses less space and less time, since it prunes the backup before adding more data. Cheers, Dave From dhoworth at mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk Fri Feb 3 10:47:29 2012 From: dhoworth at mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk (Dave Howorth) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 10:47:29 +0000 Subject: [Dirvish] dirvish-runall before dirvish-expire In-Reply-To: <20120203102519.GB22482@msgid.wurtel.net> References: <20120203102519.GB22482@msgid.wurtel.net> Message-ID: <4F2BBB41.6090108@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk> Paul Slootman wrote: > I'm wondering whether the && should be replaced by a simple > semicolon; if the expire fails for whatever reason, then I would > still like dirvish to try and make new backups. In practice, I've never seen dirvish-expire fail, except when there was some problem that would also stop dirvish-runall, so I suspect the difference is moot. I guess one's attitude depends how vital taking a backup is versus how easy to clean up the mess when something goes wrong. > (I don't know whether failures in individual image backups get passed > on through dirvish-runall, I haven't checked the code.) I don't know either :) It's not normally an issue, but would be if the running order were reversed. Cheers, Dave From matthias.veth at schmetterling.de Fri Feb 3 13:19:18 2012 From: matthias.veth at schmetterling.de (Matthias Veth) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 13:19:18 +0000 Subject: [Dirvish] dirvish-runall before dirvish-expire In-Reply-To: <4F2BB2FF.80102@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk> References: <4F2BB2FF.80102@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk> Message-ID: Ok, then i will do it that way. Thank you for your answers. So Backups will be done in night and expiration cleanup can be done after that. Thanks, and Best regards, Matthias -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: dirvish-bounces at dirvish.org [mailto:dirvish-bounces at dirvish.org] Im Auftrag von Dave Howorth Gesendet: Freitag, 3. Februar 2012 11:12 An: dirvish at dirvish.org Betreff: Re: [Dirvish] dirvish-runall before dirvish-expire Matthias Veth wrote: > Hello, > is there a problem if i modify /etc/dirvish/dirvish-cronjob so that this script first runs dirvish-runall and then dirvish-expire? > I would would change: > /usr/sbin/dirvish-expire --quiet && /usr/sbin/dirvish-runall --quiet > To /usr/sbin/dirvish-runall --quiet && /usr/sbin/dirvish-expire > --quiet > > Do you know if there is anything which speaks against this? I don't believe there's any fundamental problem. The obvious reason that its done the way it is, is that it uses less space and less time, since it prunes the backup before adding more data. Cheers, Dave _______________________________________________ Dirvish mailing list Dirvish at dirvish.org http://www.dirvish.org/mailman/listinfo/dirvish From eric at trueblade.com Mon Feb 27 10:59:19 2012 From: eric at trueblade.com (Eric V. Smith) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 05:59:19 -0500 Subject: [Dirvish] Backing up Windows computers Message-ID: <4F4B6207.1020406@trueblade.com> I've recently written an open-source Windows program that creates a volume snapshot using the Windows VSS service and then executes rsync. This allows you to back up files that are kept open by other processes. It also appears that recent cygwin sshd's have fixed the bug where rsync over ssh hangs. So I can finally back up Windows computers to a dirvish server using all free software. My blog post describing it is: http://www.trueblade.com/techblog/backing-up-windows-computers-with-dirvish The bitbucket project is: https://bitbucket.org/ericvsmith/tb-rsync-vss The README on bitbucket goes into details of setting up sshd and dirvish. Also on bitbucket are pre-built 32- and 64-bit versions with .msi files. I've run it on 75 GB backup sets with 55,000+ files without issue. But if you find any problems, bug reports are welcome. Eric.