[Box Backup] Unexpected bbackupctl behaviour with "sync" and "sync-and-wait"

[Chris Wilson]

Hi Achim,

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011, Achim wrote:

> Shouldn't the command "sync-and-wait" be renamed to 
> "force-sync-and-wait", just to be 100% consistent and avoid confusion 
> for other users?

Possibly.

> At the same time, I think that this behaviour eliminates some uses that 
> people might have for the sync-allow script, such as creating a 
> LVM/DB/VSS snapshot, since this will be skipped upon force sync.

I think it's better to do that in the notifyscript than the 
syncallowscript, as you pointed out below.

> Personally, I just moved all functionality from syncallow to the notify 
> script, particularly the backup-start and backup-stop sections that are 
> certain to be called for every backup. On a side note, other solutions 
> such as BackupPC or Amanda/Zmanda offer a very fine-grained access to 
> the different stages in the backup process:
>
> <http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/Script_API>
> <http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html#_conf_dumppreusercmd_>
>
> Would this be something useful for BB? Note the examples from zmanda to
> create snapshots or notify the user before/after backup/restore for
> specific "Backup Locations", as opposed to the current whole backup.

Yes, we could add stuff like that if it really seemed to be useful, and 
worth the effort versus implementing things like better VSS support or 
snapshots. However I don't understand what the use case would be in this 
case. Can you give me examples?

Cheers, Chris.