On Sun, 12 Aug 2018 04:00:00 +1200, Henri Derksen wrote:

> I never want WD drives ;-(.
> I have to many friends who got problems wit that make and types.
>
I had one that failed immediately, so did its replacement but ITS
replacement was fine. Both replacements were made immediately and without
a fuss. Before and since then the WD drives I've used have all been good,
with the only make to come near then being Fujitsu laptop drives. My last
failures were a Fujitsu 2.5" is around 37,000 hours and a WD 3.5" at
almost 50,000 hours.


> But what happens when at the destination there is a file called
> ProjectX, and on the source media it became a directory called ProjectX,
> with several files more in them.
>
The next rsync run removes the file from the backup disk and backs up the
directory and its contents. As you'd expect. rsync looks at dates, file
sizes and ownership as well as the filename when deciding what to do and,
iirc, is capable of replicating just the altered parts of a very big
file, e.g. a database container.

> Did you test this?
>
NO. As I said, I haven't used rsnapshot.

> Yes of course, but is it working secure?, and has that been extremely
> tested? Because everyone wants to be sure to have good, complete and
> accurate backups.
>
Lots of people use rsync. I haven't spotted any problems with it. It
deals correctly with being crashed during a backup and restarted.

> Same name, date and length are the same, but the
> contenst could nog be 100 % identical. Then you have to make a decission
> what to do?
>
Indeed, but this is always detectable under Linux because it records both
a files creation date and its most recent change date, both accurate to
the millisecond.


--
Martin    | martin at
Gregorie  | gregorie dot org

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05