Difference between revisions of "Talk:1718: Backups"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 5: Line 5:
  
 
<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~-->
 
<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~-->
 +
 +
This happens. It can really surprise you when the exponential curve is flat enough. We had a case where we kept a log of the backups on a server that was backed up. This went fine for years, until at some point when we ran out of backup space we found that backups of the logs of backups consumed over 99% of our diskspace.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.87.11|162.158.87.11]] 10:04, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:04, 11 August 2016

I think this makes more sense if only a small portion of all files from the laptop complete the ENTIRE loop. if the total percentage of files which complete the entire loop is 0.0004% , and he backups once a month, that should give him exponential growth slightly smaller than Moore's Law. At 18 months, his total file size would be about 168% of the original. 172.68.58.245 22:03, 10 August 2016 (UTC)


Also, the title text my refer to that often when you lose a project and have to start over from scratch, the project become so much better. 162.158.133.102 01:55, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


This happens. It can really surprise you when the exponential curve is flat enough. We had a case where we kept a log of the backups on a server that was backed up. This went fine for years, until at some point when we ran out of backup space we found that backups of the logs of backups consumed over 99% of our diskspace.162.158.87.11 10:04, 11 August 2016 (UTC)