[Dirvish] dirvish-runall before dirvish-expire

Paul Slootman paul at debian.org
Fri Feb 3 10:25:19 UTC 2012

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.)


More information about the Dirvish mailing list