Re: --sequential-read not sequential???

andycapo--- via Dar-support <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.sysutils.backup.dar.support
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hello, about the "simple yes/no summary of the --test would be nice to add", you may be interested in checking the EXIT CODE value.

From DAR manual: EXIT CODE value [5] "is returned when an error concerning the treated data has been detected. While saving, this is the case when a file could not be opened or read. While restoring, it is the case when a file could not be created or replaced. While comparing, it is the case when a file in the archive does not match the one in the filesystem. While testing, it is the case when a file is corrupted in the archive."

Regards
Andy

> Il 19 febbraio 2020 alle 12.15 Graham Cobb <[email protected]> ha scritto:
> 
> 
> I am confused and could do with some help.
> 
> I want to check (--test) my main DAR backup archives to make sure they
> have not been corrupted. Unfortunately, the NAS that stores the archives
> can't run dar, and my desktop doesn't have enough diskspace to store all
> the slices at once. So, I have created a simple script to use -E to copy
> each slice over as it is needed, and delete it when the next one is
> requested.
> 
> As the copying takes quite a long time, I decided to use
> --sequential-read so that the slices only get used once each. So, my
> command looks like:
> 
> dar -t "/var/tmp/$archive" \
> 	-E 'rm "%p/%b."*".%e"' \
> 	-E "echo Fetching $dir/%b.%n.%e.gpg..." \
> 	-E "gpg -d -q -o '%p/%b.%n.%e' --batch  '$dir/%b.%n.%e.gpg'" \
> 	--sequential-read
> 
> This seems to work. I get the following output at the end, which I
> presume means success (a simple yes/no summary of the --test would be
> nice to add, by the way :-) ):
> 
>  --------------------------------------------
>  5661770 item(s) treated
>  0 item(s) with error
>  0 item(s) ignored (excluded by filters)
>  --------------------------------------------
>  Total number of items considered: 5661770
>  --------------------------------------------
> 
> HOWEVER, looking at the output of all the "Fetching" messages, I notice
> that after reading all 117 slices in order, dar fetched slices
> 1,8,9,10,11,13 and 117 again!
> 
> Shouldn't --sequential-read prevent that? Or am I misunderstanding how
> it works?
> 
> Graham
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dar-support mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dar-support
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.