Re: [Duplicity-talk] Unable to restore a recent version

[edgar . soldin]

On 31.05.2011 22:39, Jarno Rantanen wrote:
> Hi list,
> 
> I've been using Duplicity for a while now and love it!  However, after
> performing a test restore I noticed that some files I know I've recently
> changed didn't have those changes after being restored.  Specifically, they
> appear to be at the state they were in a couple of months ago.

Is the change in the picture or a time stamp, filessystem metadata?
 
> The output of the restore command (with -v 9) can be found from
> http://pastebin.com/17rV1u53 (it's a bit much to paste to an email).
> 
> There are two things that caught my eye here:
> 
> 1. The processing ends at "Processed volume 50 of 64" instead of 64/64.
> Could it be that for some reason the more recent version of the file could
> be in the last, unprocessed volumes?

I guess duplicity only needs information from one volume to restore that file 
(it's small).

> 2. At one point the backup chains being read in start to get ignored (first
> one on line 447): "Ignoring incremental Backupset (start_time: Wed Mar  9
> 03:00:03 2011; needed: Tue Mar  8 03:00:02 2011)"

I checked with a backup here and this seems to be the behaviour after occuring 
the second full (starting a new chain). i occure

Ignoring incremental Backupset (start_time: Tue May 31 03:00:18 2011; needed: 
Tue Mar  8 03:00:08 2011)
Ignoring incremental Backupset (start_time: Tue May 31 03:00:18 2011; needed: 
Fri Apr  8 03:00:15 2011)
Ignoring incremental Backupset (start_time: Tue May 31 03:00:18 2011; needed: 
Mon May  9 03:00:08 2011)
Added incremental Backupset (start_time: Tue May 31 03:00:18 2011 / end_time: 
Wed Jun  1 03:00:09 2011)
Added set Wed Jun  1 03:00:09 2011 to pre-existing chain [Tue May 10 03:00:08 
2011]-[Wed Jun  1 03:00:09 2011]

it seems to try every known chain full (dunno why) until it succeedes at the 
end adding it to the end of last chain.
Your pastebin output looks similar and the incrementals are also list later on 
in the chain overview, hence this should be fine.

> Any ideas as to why I'm unable to restore the most recent version of the
> file ("IMG_1337.JPG")?  From running collection-status it would appear that
> my backups have been running with success since Mon Feb 7, but apparently
> not..?
> 

Sorry no. But you could verify that your backup really does ''not'' archive 
changes. The commands list and restore support time stamps. 
http://duplicity.nongnu.org/duplicity.1.html
Add a new test file (wait a day or run your backup manually) and check if list 
with appropriate time shows file, or not (e.g. it wasn't there a day before, 
but is in latest).

good luck, ede