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

Chris Wilson chris at qwirx.com
Mon Oct 10 23:33:09 BST 2011


Hi Achim,

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011, Achim J. Latz wrote:
> On 16/06/2011 17:50, Chris Wilson wrote:
>> 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.
>
> Thank you for the conclusive answer ;-)

I didn't want to commit to changing it or not, or to assert that my point 
of view is right, but it feels like a bikeshed issue to me.

> I have to admit that I was confused by the description: I have worked 
> around that misconception now.

Which description, where?

> Depending on the backup locations, people might want to run a DB-dump 
> script (but just before that particular location is backed up, not at 
> the beginning of the overall 20TB backup that runs for 10 hours before 
> getting to the DB location!), or send an email/SMS every time after a 
> certain critical location was backed up OK.

I think it's worth weighing this against the additional complexity 
required of NotifyScript to handle all these extra notifications, 
especially given that it might be written in cmd.exe batch language.

I'm not dead against it, but I would like some more justification, 
particularly when this use case could just as well (maybe better) be 
achieved by using the NotifyScript to create a snapshot, copy the files 
somewehere else, delete the snapshot and then backup the copy of the 
files. All of that can be done without any VSS support in Box Backup at 
all.

Cheers, Chris.
-- 
_____ __     _
\  __/ / ,__(_)_  | Chris Wilson <chris+sig at qwirx.com> Cambs UK |
/ (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer |
\__/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software |



More information about the Boxbackup mailing list