|
From: | Manuel Morales |
Subject: | Re: [Duplicity-talk] Resume rsync to rsync.net |
Date: | Sat, 22 Apr 2017 01:27:50 -0400 |
User-agent: | Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.17.0.160611 |
Hi Tyler Actually I was testing and I read a little the man pages. I changed the volume size with the command line, and increased the verbosity: duplicity --volsize 50 --verbosity 8 It works pretty neat actually, I think duplicity tries to upload “per-volume”,,, so a 500MB backup folder will yield 10 volumes on the destination. Duplicity will be able to resume, as long as at least 1 volume was already transferred to the destination. I tested a few times, and it resumes nicely. The reason I didn’t see it before, is because the default volsize is 200MB, (actually the volume on the destination will be a little more than whatever volsize is specified),, So, everytime I tested, I cut the transfer as soon as 200MB were on the destination, so in reality, the first volume never got completely transferred. That’s why it was starting from scratch every time, because everytime duplicity tried to resume, it found that volume1 was not completed. It is easier to see if you force the volsize to a smaller size, and increasing the verbosity. My thanks to everybody that writes and maintain duplicity. Dotty From: Tyler Ham <address@hidden> Hi, I think what you are describing is some expected behavior with rsync by default. It waits to write to the destination file until it has assembled all of that file's content in a temporary file on the destination server. So if you Ctrl-C, the actual destination file hasn't been touched yet and rsync will have to start over on that file next time. The rsync command line has an '--inplace' option that tells it to write directly to the destination file instead of using a temporary file, in which case it should resume the way you want it to after a Ctrl+C or a network outage. You might try duplicity with --rsync-options="--inplace" and see if that works for your use case. Tyler On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Manuel Morales via Duplicity-talk <address@hidden> wrote:
|
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |