On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Gordon Messmer <yinyang at eburg.com> wrote: > On 01/18/2013 01:59 AM, M. Fioretti wrote: >> even if all the "rsyncing" needed would be something equivalent to "mv >> holidays_2013 family_holidays_2013" on the remote server. Is it >> possible to tell rsync to behave in that way? > > No, which is why some people use Mercurial or git to keep data in sync > in multiple places. It's not very space efficient, but can be more > network efficient than rsync in transferring changes and renames. I think an incremental 'dump' can catch renames. zfs's incremental send/receive would track just the changed disk blocks. Not sure what else would handle it better. Backuppc would transfer a new copy but if you were keeping more than one backup the matching files would end up being stored as links to each other and not take additional space. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com