On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 19:45 Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:56 AM Tom Browder <tom.browder_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 12:10 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel_at_gmail.com>
> > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 6:31 PM Tom Browder <tom.browder_at_gmail.com>
> > ...
> > > > Given that history will be lost, does anyone see any problems with
> my recovery plan?
> > ...
> > > If you have working copies and you don't care about history, why are
> > > you spending any cycles on doing anything with hotcopy? You've lost
> > > history anyway, why keep any of it?
> > Cycles aren't important, but the size of the data is. Transferring the
> > working copy from scratch would take a LONG time, while the bulk of
> > the data are already there in the hotcopy.
> Under what possible conditions wound importing a single snapshot of
> the current working copy, without history, take more time than working
> from a hotcopy to overlay the changes on top of that hotcopy?
I don’t know, Nico, I am a real novice at this. Your first answer didn’t
help because I didn’t know the ramifications of what I was trying to do.
The original data, from just six months ago, was about 27 Gb, which took a
very long time to upload from my home computer to my remote server. Since
the only hotcopy, done shortly after the repo was loaded, there has been
very little change, so if I could start with the hotcopy and somehow synch
my working copy without pushing 27 Gb again, life would be better.
Howver, it sounds like there is no way around a massive upload again :-(
Received on 2018-12-11 03:10:18 CET