From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DD6615815E for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2024 21:50:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 707EBE2A52; Wed, 7 Feb 2024 21:50:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.hosts.co.uk (smtp.hosts.co.uk [85.233.160.19]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04449E29C4 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2024 21:50:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from host86-152-228-249.range86-152.btcentralplus.com ([86.152.228.249] helo=[192.168.1.99]) by smtp.hosts.co.uk with esmtpa (Exim) (envelope-from ) id 1rXpo0-000000003KE-2fSg for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 07 Feb 2024 21:50:08 +0000 Message-ID: <89a2a57b-761d-4cdf-b64c-7f876a37ef26@youngman.org.uk> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 21:50:07 +0000 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme? To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <4553703.LvFx2qVVIh@iris> <6028761.lOV4Wx5bFT@iris> Content-Language: en-GB From: Wols Lists In-Reply-To: <6028761.lOV4Wx5bFT@iris> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: e71e9f22-6e7e-4886-8712-4941ce0cd6e6 X-Archives-Hash: 653b02dc489baf9040eaf59c7ebb27f7 On 07/02/2024 11:07, J. Roeleveld wrote: >> Because snapshotting uses so much less space? >> >> So much so that, for normal usage, I probably have no need to delete any >> snapshots, for YEARS? > My comment was based on using rsync to copy from the source to the backup > filesystem. Well, that's EXACTLY what I'm doing too. NO DIFFERENCE. Actually, there is a minor difference - because I'm using lvm, I'm also using rsync's "overwrite in place" switch. In other words, it compares source and destination *in*place*, and if any block has changed, it overwrites the change, rather than creating a complete new copy. Because lvm is COW, that means I have two copies of the file, in two different snapshots, but inasmuch as the files are identical, there's only one copy of the identical bits. > >> Okay, space is not an expensive commodity, and you don't want too many >> snapshots, simply because digging through all those snapshots would be a >> nightmare, but personally I wouldn't use a crude rsync simply because I >> prefer to be frugal in my use of resources. > What is "too many"? > I currently have about 1800 snapshots on my server. Do have a tool that > ensures it doesn't get out of hand and will remove several over time. > "Too many" is whatever you define it to be. I'm likely to hang on to my /home snapshots for yonks. My / snapshots, on the other hand, I delete anything more than a couple of months old. If I can store several years of /home snapshots without running out of space, why shouldn't I? The problem, if I *am* running out of space, I'm going to have to delete a *lot* of snapshots to make much difference... Cheers, Wol