-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 203
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
"Remote host doesn't support hardlinks" but manual hardlinks are possible #1164
Comments
I believe I have a similar problem using a local NTFS formated USB hard disk. Each backup operation make new copies of my files with just one link when viewed with "ls -l." However when I use the linus command line tools I can make a hard link using "ln" It looks as if the linux driver can make hard links but back in time doesn't make use of the fact, unike the "ln" command. Running back in time with a local ext4 filesystem works as expected with multiple links when viewed with "ls -l" |
similar problem here. i have made backups for many years without problems (last on 2021-08-16). now, the backup on usb drive formatted ext4 don't creates hard-links but copies files from within the same drive. i noticed also that the option "use full rsync" is no longer present in the gui. manual creation of ln on the drive works as LucasBec said. debian stable (bullseye) 64bit $ lsusb -t | grep -i storage fdisk -l $ cat /etc/fstab $ mount $ backintime-qt_polkit --debug |
tried with master branch, same effect. |
Hi, Thank you. Best Regards. |
happened again today. solution:
then run bit twice and delete first backup taken. 😕 |
This is a tough one … we've got 4 people reporting the same error message on:
Are you all still affected by this problem? |
after i fixed with the proposed workaroud, no more happened |
Hi, I have the same issue, and it seems to be happening only in remote hosts. I have one local ntfs partition and the incremental backups are working fine. it is using hard links because the size of the folder is much smaller than the size of each backup put together. But I tried to move my backups to another ntfs disk that I have in a different server in the network. I selected ssh and set up everything, but it doesn't allow it, it shows the message "Remote host doesn't support hardlinks". Please, let me know if this is going to be solved, ntfs is the only fs that makes sense if you have linux and windows in the same network. |
* carmurio ***@***.***> [05-12-23 20:24]:
Hi, I have the same issue, and it seems to be happening only in remote hosts.
I have one local ntfs partition and the incremental backups are working fine. it is using hard links because the size of the folder is much smaller than the size of each backup put together.
But I tried to move my backups to another ntfs disk that I have in a different server in the network. I selected ssh and set up everything, but it doesn't allow it, it shows the message "Remote host doesn't support hardlinks".
Please, let me know if this is going to be solved, ntfs is the only fs that makes sense if you have linux and windows in the same network.
I have cifs working quite well, also sshfs works excellently if ssh is
installed on windoz.
…--
(paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri
http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri
Photos: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/piwigo paka @ IRCnet oftc
|
@ALL Could you please show us the mount options of your SMB/NTFS remote drive? Since you are using I want to find out if some permission or timestamp options may always cause a full re-backup because |
sorry, i switched to ext4 fs. |
Hi, the target system was a usb hd drive mounted in a raspberry pi 3b, here
is the record in the fstab file. However, my usb drive died and I already
switched to a new drive formatted in zfs, which is used only for backups
from my linux system. So I can't really test it anymore if you need it.
#LABEL=usbntfs /mnt/usbhd auto
rw,nosuid,nodev,nofail,uid=xxxxxx,gid=xxxxx 0 0
Regards,
Carlos
…On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 3:21 PM aryoda ***@***.***> wrote:
@ALL <https://github.com/ALL> Could you please show us the mount options
of your SMB/NTFS remote drive?
Since you are using ssh I need the mount options of the target system.
I want to find out if some permission or timestamp options may always
cause a full re-backup because rsync thinks the files have changed (so no
hardlink is created if though technically the remote system would be able
to do so).
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1164 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANHD2TQLBDKE7GSLCHG332LX4CB3XANCNFSM45SXKLXQ>
.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Can you still remember, if NTFS or NTFS-3g was used as filesystem type? |
Bug Analysis
This error message is created in our It checks if all required (shell) command and hardlinks are supported over ssh: Lines 964 to 967 in 5efb5d6
Yes, this prevents calling above function but then (without working hardlinks) you end up with full copies in every snapshot (because
Yes, SMB (and also NTFS-3g) support hardlinks (if configured correctly). Suspected reasonWhen using SMB or NTFS-3g via
|
rsync1 = tools.rsyncPrefix( | |
self.config, no_perms=False, progress=False) |
Since SMB (and NTFS-3g) apply user and permission mappings via the mount options no hardlinks created when the owner, group and permissions of the source file are different from the owner, group and permissions of the target
and they are different because user and permission mappings are applied via the mount options.
To check if this happens in your case please show us here your mount options of the remote server or even better connect via ssh
and copy local file to the remote and check the permissions (with stats
or ls -l
).
When using SMB or NFTS-3g mounted locally (without ssh
)
This setup was reported as failing in BiT by @rjdriscoll and @texsit while @ptilopteri reported it does work.
The reasons is the same: User and permission mappings in the mount options.
So could you please post your mount options here to verify this (use mount
and find the line with your device which contains the actual mount options even if defaults apply).
BTW: In this constellation our function checkRemoteCommands()
is not called so you do not see the "remote host doesn't support hardlinks" error message.
Possible other reasons:
Besides the mount options in case of SMB also a configuration file needs to be tweaked to support hardlinks (TODO: Which one?)
Workaround
Below workaround should work for all scenarios except a wrong SMB configuration.
Could you all please test it and give us feedback here?
Fix
The fix depends on how we solve #988
My goal is to backup to a SSH host which has a smb share mounted.
When I try to create the profile, i get:
"Remote host doesn't support hardlinks"
If I leave the option "check if remote host support all neccessary commands" disabled, I can create the profile, but incremental backups are indeed not performed with hardlinks. Strangely enough, manual creation of hardlinks works just fine.
If i do
touch a
andln a b
on the smb share on the remote host, the files a and b have the same inode number.If I choose a path which is not on the smb share, backintime does not complain about missing hardlink support.
Maybe this is not an issue of backintime but of rsync
local version of rsync: v3.2.3
remote version of rsync: version 3.1.3
Does anyone have any ideas what else I can do?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: