[rrd-users] Incremental backup rrd file

Simon Hobson linux at thehobsons.co.uk
Tue Jul 17 13:47:43 CEST 2012

Darren Murphy wrote:
>Just to add a little to this, the --stats & --human-readable options
>provide useful insight as to the efficiency of rsync
>So 3121 files totaling 4.3GB in size, and at least 90% of those files
>would change between successive sync runs, yet only a very small
>amount of data needs to be transferred.

That tallies with my experience. Obviously it varies considerably 
with the type of data, but I've yet to find something where it 
doesn't show a reduction in data transferred.
In general, RRD files should 'compress' quite well (unless you use 
very small consolidations).

>I'd also add that in my experience rsync is incredibly robust and reliable.
>I've been running an hourly rsync from my main MRTG server to 3
>separate "slaves" for almost 2 years now, and never once had a problem
>with data integrity.

I'll second that. And of course, even if the process dies part way 
through, you can just run it again and it will catch up.

Simon Hobson

Visit http://www.magpiesnestpublishing.co.uk/ for books by acclaimed
author Gladys Hobson. Novels - poetry - short stories - ideal as
Christmas stocking fillers. Some available as e-books.

More information about the rrd-users mailing list