Re:Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox
by avar on Friday September 23, 2016 @03:50PM
(#12567453)
Only if the sync is the equivalent of:
Instead of:
Or some such equivalent, i.e. doing the full sync and then atomically juggling a symlink around.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
that creates many more writes to the ssd.
Re:Heavy SSD Writes from Firefox
by waterhouse on Friday September 23, 2016 @05:04PM
(#12567930)
Does it? Consider this scheme: maintain two physical directories, one of which is current (and is named by a symlink) and the other of which is old. When doing a sync, you rsync the newest data into the old directory, then update the symlink. It'll probably result in somewhere between 1x and 2x the writes as the non-atomic single-directory scheme, depending on how well adjacent diffs combine. It will also result in twice the space used (barring some very clever filesystem).
He should have used --link-dest= on his rsync.
PREVIOUS_BACKUP=$(cat ./prev_backup)
NEW_BACKUP=$(date +%F_%T)
rsync --link-dest=$PREVIOUS_BACKUP /path/source /path/dest/$NEW_BACKUP
echo $NEW_BACKUP > ./prev_backup
This will copy /path/source to /path/dest/$NEW_BACKUP (which is a time stamped folder). But it will take into account the previous backup. If a file hasn't changed, it will create a hard link. If it changed, it will then copy the whole file.And that's it.
Since it's the name is a time stamp. When you need to restore, just read ./prev_backup or just list the directory content, sort it and read the last entry.