On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:00:45PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > >I'd always put a step 0) in there: is imaging what you want to do? Consider > >a file-level backup with rsync (etc etc, as discussed elsewhere in this > >thread) > > I do imaging for system disks. I do backups and archives for data. So having evangelised file-level copies a few times in this thread, I found myself wondering if I would have been better off with imaging this very weekend. Copying a 2.1T filesystem from an internal SATA2 disk to an external one (my regular backup drive to my once-a-month, lives off-site one) via USB3 took nearly 48 hours via "rsync -a", and the destination ended up bigger, possibly because one or more of the backups on the source had been using some kind of hardlink de-dupe (I've ranted about hardlink trees being a problem in various backup topics on -user, too...) and I didn't think to supply -S to rsync. The real test will be how long an incremental catch-up will take in the future. -- Jonathan Dowland Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature