I am testing UrBackup server on a Ubuntu box using btrfs filesystem for backup storage. Nice program, thank you! I have a Windows 10 client with a 500GB hard drive using about 90GB space. I assumed the full image backup would take the longest and most storage space on the server.
I noticed it took about 40 minutes to full-image the client’s 90 GB. I was thinking that the incremental image backups would go much faster. It seems to take about the same time and am wondering if the incremental has to upload the complete data image in order to compare the differences from full (and possibly subsequent incremental backups) to the new partial image? It does appear to only take approximately 3GB for each incremental backup so storage is saved compared to running only full image backups. Am I noticing this correctly?
I am mainly concerned with network traffic if I deploy this to the ~25 clients on this network.
Yes, start from default settings and work from that, change a bit every day, then week or so.
For C:\User or not, i dunno. That’s kinda up to you to check if saving the whole c: is to expensive.
Also maybe you create d: data drive, then add this as well.
I guess most usually peoples will ask for a deleted “my documents” or whatnot , so it would be c:\users, thus 6 hours granularity.
If not the granularity would be weekly as you’d have to dig an image, and it would kinda be their fault as they did not stored data where you told them to.