Hi,
you, Brian Albright, wrote on 08.12.2006 at 16:30:47 [[BackupPC-users] : Out of
space on the backup volume. (Craig Barratt)]:
>
> [...]
> This reply below seems to state [...]
Mistake 1: the reply is below.
Mistake 2: you're posting a list digest to the mailing list instead of only
the relevant part of the relevant posting:
Craig Barratt wrote on Wed, 29 Nov 2006 09:46:05 -0800 [Re: [BackupPC-users]
Out of space on the backup volume.]:
> Daniel writes:
> > The thing is... that the nightly cleanups do not happen. And thus, we
> > get this in log files:
>
> My guess is that nothing is getting deleted from the pool since no
> further backups have been deleted.
Had you done this, you might have avoided
Mistake 3: you're not reading what you're replying to.
Craig wrote "no further backups *have been deleted*", not "no further backups
*are happening*".
$Conf {flame} -> off ();
If, in your case, no further backups are being deleted *because* no further
backups are happening, you'll have to decrease the backup counts you're
telling BackupPC to keep, which you apparently did. Maybe you are mistaking
what the "Keep" options mean and how they interact? BackupPC may be keeping
more full backups if they are needed by incrementals depending on them.
Also, don't expect the amount of storage listed for a to-be-deleted backup
in the "New Files" size column to be released, because these "new files" may
(partly) be "existing files" to a newer backup (and thus need to be kept).
In theory, if you back up data consisting of files which are never changed
but only added to, i.e. you only create new files and never delete or change
already existing files, then deleting older backups will never free any
space at all (and your backup summaries will look quite normal: lots of
existing files, some new files). Of course, that's not the situation most of
us have (at least not that pure), but perhaps it gives a hint of why less
storage is released than you might first think. Efficient handling of
duplicate contents comes at the cost of not saving anything by keeping less
copies of these contents (well, yes, inodes and a few bytes of meta-data).
Sure, you may have a completely different problem, but from the sparse hints
you give (which is mistake 4), it's hard to answer anything else than "buy
more storage or keep less backups".
Sorry for getting angry about just one more instance of "what happened so
far on backuppc-users ...". You are not the only one on this list who might
find taking a look at [1] or even [2] quite interesting.
Hope that helps anyway.
Regards,
Holger
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netiquette
[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
