[Dirvish] dirvish-runall before dirvish-expire
dhoworth at mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk
Fri Feb 3 10:12:15 UTC 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
> /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.
More information about the Dirvish