[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Hot backup changes

From: Michael Price <mprice_at_atl.lmco.com>
Date: 2002-08-22 19:00:37 CEST

Benjamin Pflugmann writes:
> I assume the idea is that you can make an incremental backup of the
> repository via dump, but not via binary copy.
> In other words: Yes, a dump will be larger than the repos, but when
> you want to keep a backup every day, the binary copies for a month
> will takes 30 times the space, while the incremental dumps will be far
> less.

Ok. That makes a little more sense. However, the space savings isn't all
that drastic unless you make and keep a lot of full backups. For instance,
I have two repos where the gzip'd dump is a little over 10 times larger
than the gzip'd repo itself. So, it would be 10 days before the full repo
backups became larger than the incremental backups (if I were making daily

Only I'm not making daily backups, I'm making bi-weekly backups which I
never have more than 10 of because I erase them after my monthly full
system backup is burned to disc and stored safely. (home machine)

In production environments your going to have daily filesystem backups
anyway and even if you're crazy and only do weekly backups you still only
end up with 7 svn hot-backups.

In other words, assuming you have a proper backup system in place at your
site then most of this discussion is a little pointless. But I'm not
responsible for the svn backups so take whatever I say with a few grains
of salt.

Just my $.02 :)


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 22 19:01:14 2002

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.