[BackupPC-devel] New Feature Request - Concurrent resources backup for same host

[Garcia, Sergio]

Hi guys.
First of all, thank you for your excellent work, I've been using BackupPC
for a long time and it's awesome.

Now, here's my suggestion: create the option to allow N concurrent
resources backup for a host. I take incremental backups for a server who
stores more than 1TB (in different resources) and the rsync list building
process takes most of the time (up to 20 hours) while the copy process
takes only one or two hours. As my server is power enough to make those
rsyncs at same time, the backup time will be reduced significatively.

My current solution is to sepparate the host in two hosts entries, with
same IP and information but different resources, but even when it works,
it's a little bit tricky.

Finally, I'm a developer (not an expert in Perl), but I would try to make
it by myself if someone points me to the right part of the code.

Thanks in advance
Sergio

[Les Mikesell]

Post by Garcia, Sergio
Hi guys.
First of all, thank you for your excellent work, I've been using BackupPC
for a long time and it's awesome.
Now, here's my suggestion: create the option to allow N concurrent resources
backup for a host. I take incremental backups for a server who stores more
than 1TB (in different resources) and the rsync list building process takes
most of the time (up to 20 hours) while the copy process takes only one or
two hours. As my server is power enough to make those rsyncs at same time,
the backup time will be reduced significatively.
My current solution is to sepparate the host in two hosts entries, with same
IP and information but different resources, but even when it works, it's a
little bit tricky.
Finally, I'm a developer (not an expert in Perl), but I would try to make it
by myself if someone points me to the right part of the code.

I'd like to see changes to the scheduler that would let you control
concurrency by groups (same bandwidth-limited network path, VMs on
the same physical host, etc.), but in the case of a single large host
I think it would take major changes to the scheduler to match the
options you get by pretending it is two or more independent targets.
Usually the thing you need most in that situation is the ability to
skew the slower full runs of different sections to happen different
days.

--
Les Mikesell
***@gmail.com