duplicity-team team mailing list archive

[Peter Schuller <question115570@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #115570 on Duplicity changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/duplicity/+question/115570

    Status: Open => Answered

Peter Schuller proposed the following answer:
As far as I know, what I stated in that mailing list thread pretty much
still applies. If you're fine with the temp space, and your volume sizes
are not so large that individual transfers are too unreliable, and your
storage backend does not impose limits, I see no reason not to go for
250 mb.

When I did that the first time (backing up a few hundreds of gigs), I
did run into a performance issue but that was fixed as a result
(duplicity no longer allocates huge buffers just because the volume size
is huge).

If I recall correctly I was doing 250 mb volume sizes for a long time;
and that was towards s3/rsync.net, rather than a local network-mounted
filesystem.

Note though that if the 'storage backend' is the fie system, is does
depend on how it behaves. I'm not aware of issues with CIFS, but for
example some versions of AFS/Coda might have issues with large file
efficiency.

-- 
You received this question notification because you are a member of
duplicity-team, which is an answer contact for Duplicity.