From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from len.romanrm.net ([91.121.75.85]:52908 "EHLO len.romanrm.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750716AbdKAFPM (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2017 01:15:12 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 10:15:10 +0500 From: Roman Mamedov To: Dave Cc: Linux fs Btrfs Subject: Re: Need help with incremental backup strategy (snapshots, defragmentingt & performance) Message-ID: <20171101101510.218eeead@natsu> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 01:00:08 -0400 Dave wrote: > To reconcile those conflicting goals, the only idea I have come up > with so far is to use btrfs send-receive to perform incremental > backups as described here: > https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Incremental_Backup . Another option is to just use the regular rsync to a designated destination subvolume on the backup host, AND snapshot that subvolume on that host from time to time (or on backup completions, if you can synchronize that). rsync --inplace will keep space usage low as it will not reupload entire files in case of changes/additions to them. Yes rsync has to traverse both directory trees to find changes, but that's pretty fast (couple of minutes at most, for a typical root filesystem), especially if you use SSD or SSD caching. -- With respect, Roman