[CentOS] [OT] Using rsync to backup / restore - when to use (or not use) the -H option switch?

[Francis Gerund]

Okay, thanks guys.  It seems that -H sould be included by default, unless
there is a specific reason not to.

Maybe the rsync -a option switch should include hard links by default.
Rsync tutorial type information usually lists generic examples such as:

sudo rsync -avz <source> <destination>

and not addressing the subject of hard links.


And you weren't kidding about the number of entries in /var/lib/yum/yumdb.
Wow!



On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Gordon Messmer
> <gordon.messmer at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 02/11/2015 09:02 AM, Francis Gerund wrote:
> >>
> >> When using rsync to backup and restore, when should and when should one
> >> *not*  include hard links (by using the -H option switch)?
> >
> >
> > It's probably too site or application specific to give any general
> advice.
> >
> > Run this command across the filesystem you're going to back up:
> >     find /path -type f -links +1
> >
> > All of the files listed in find's output have multiple links, and will
> > benefit from using -H.
> >
> > The cost associated with -H is that rsync has to keep a table in memory
> of
> > all of the inodes and paths that it processes.  A large filesystem can
> cause
> > rsync to consume a lot of RAM.  If sufficient RAM is available, I would
> > always recommend -H.
>
> I don't know about the actual implementation, but wouldn't it really
> only need to track the inodes/paths of the files with >1 link?
>
> --
>    Les Mikesell
>       lesmikesell at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>