我可以使用“在线备份”吗?备份我的 DVS 而不是推送到外部存储库?

发布于 2024-09-04 02:31:51 字数 287 浏览 4 评论 0原文

我目前注册了一个第三方服务,该服务托管我的 Mercurial 存储库作为中央枢纽,以将我的更改推送为一种备份。

现在,我正在寻找一个系统来备份我的笔记本电脑,并考虑使用 Mozy。我是一名贷款开发商,使用笔记本电脑工作,通常通过 wifi 连接到互联网,而我的笔记本电脑仅在工作时才真正打开,所以感觉像 Mozy 这样的东西是我的最佳选择。

我的问题是,如果我是唯一的开发人员,我可以只使用本地 Mercurial 存储库并使用 Mozy 备份所有内容吗?而不是推送到外部仓库?

非常感谢

马特

I'm currently signed up with a third party service that hosts my mercurial repositories as a central hub to push my changes to as a sort of backup.

Now, I'm looking at a system to backup my laptop and am concidering Mozy. I'm a loan developer, and work on a laptop and am usualy connected to my internet via wifi with my laptop only really being on when I'm working, so feel something like Mozy is my best option.

My question is, if I'm the only developer, could I get away with just using local mercurial repos and using Mozy to backup everything up? Rather than pushing to an external repo?

Many thanks

Matt

如果你对这篇内容有疑问,欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论,获取更多帮助,或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。

扫码二维码加入Web技术交流群

发布评论

需要 登录 才能够评论, 你可以免费 注册 一个本站的账号。

评论(1

落花随流水 2024-09-11 02:31:51

免责声明:我的经验是使用 git 而不是 hg,但据我了解,这些概念同样适用于这两个系统。

备份到远程存储库的一个优点是,如果本地存储库损坏(可能是由于底层文件系统的问题),该损坏不会转移到备份,除非工作树中的文件本身已损坏。

例如,存储库中的某些对象(可能是那些因为不更改而很少访问的对象)可能会损坏。可能需要几个月的时间才能再次使用这些文件之一,因此几个月后您才会注意到(尽管我认为执行垃圾收集运行,例如 git gc,会检测到损坏)。

因此,如果您通过推送提交进行备份,您将创建这些对象的独立版本,并使用校验和(即提交哈希)来验证任何新文件的传输。然而,如果您备份到备份提供程序,您将复制存储库中的实际对象,无论它们处于何种状态,并复制对这些文件的任何更改,包括它们的损坏。

通常备份提供商会给你回滚(spideroak 似乎对此特别好),但你仍然需要筛选通过很多版本来弄清楚腐败发生的时间;对于某些提供商来说,回滚期也是有限的(特别是对于免费帐户)。

Disclaimer: My experience is with git rather than hg, but as I understand it the concepts apply equally to both systems.

An advantage of backing up to a remote repo is that if your local repo becomes corrupted (perhaps due to a problem with the underlying filesystem), that corruption does not get transferred over to the backup, unless the files in your working tree themselves are corrupted.

For example, it's possible for some of the objects in the repository, perhaps those which are rarely accessed because you don't change them, to become corrupted. It could be months before you use one of those files again, and so months before you notice (though I think doing a garbage collect run, eg git gc, will detect corruption).

So if you are backing up by pushing commits, you're creating an independent version of those objects, and using checksums (ie the commit hash) to verify the transfer of any new files. Whereas if you are backing up to a backup provider, you're duplicating the actual objects in the repo, in whatever state they are in, and duplicating any changes to those files, including corruption of them.

Usually backup providers will give you rollback (spideroak seems to be particularly good for this) but you'll still have to sift through a lot of versions to figure out when the corruption happened; also with some providers, the rollback period is limited (especially for free accounts).

~没有更多了~
我们使用 Cookies 和其他技术来定制您的体验包括您的登录状态等。通过阅读我们的 隐私政策 了解更多相关信息。 单击 接受 或继续使用网站,即表示您同意使用 Cookies 和您的相关数据。
原文