duplicity-team team mailing list archive

[edso <question263976@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #263976 on Duplicity changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/duplicity/+question/263976

    Status: Open => Answered

edso proposed the following answer:
On 22.03.2015 13:36, Marco B. wrote:
> Question #263976 on Duplicity changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/duplicity/+question/263976
> 
>     Status: Answered => Open
> 
> Marco B. is still having a problem:
> Thank you very much for the explanation. That makes sense, but still,
> why would it need 1.7GB in /tmp? I would expect it to need 835MB in /tmp
> and the same in the local cache...
> 
> These are the temporary files created in whatever temp dir is specified:
> 
> # ls /tmp/duplicity-q_os9X-tempdir/ -lrth
> totale 1,3G
> -rw-rw-r--.  1 marco marco 834M 22 mar 13.18 mktemp-8k2YcZ-1
> -rw-rw-r--.  1 marco marco 834M 22 mar 13.19 mktemp-1b9tpR-2
> 
> They look identical (I couldn't check because they are deleted too fast). The first one is then deleted, and the second one seems to be copied to the local cache, then deleted too.
> I also cleaned up the target dir from incomplete sets, but this didn't change.
> 
> Thank you,
> Marco
> 

hey Marco,

please run duplicity in max. verbose mode. it'll tell you what files are created in the context of what it is doing. please attach post the appropriate parts with some margin above and below here for us to see what is going on.
make sure to obfuscate parts you deem private in the log.

generally, as signatures and manifests are not run through librsync
there is no need for a second copy in temp.

..ede/duply.net

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