Continuing the discussion from Incremental backups and efficiency:
Summary of that previous thread: Using a filter in order to achieve an incremental backup (e.g.,
rclone copy src Backup:src --max-age 10d) was unexpectedly slow, even when the filter ended up matching no files at all.
Various options were suggested, with various results. The conclusion was to run a first step of identifying the files locally and then feed that list into the copy, like so:
rclone lsf --max-age 10d src > files-to-copy rclone copy --files-from files-to-copy src Backup:src
Then yesterday this comment came in from @Ciantic
I think the
--no-traversewas put back, since it's in the docs. So I think the command is just copy with no traverse flag.
So...my reply (which I hope @Ciantic sees) :
Thanks much for the idea!
Yes it looks like that flag has returned as of v1.46 and it is promising. It was restored for Using --files-from with Drive hammers the API
There's a lot in that thread so I'm not sure what applies and what doesn't. (It looks like the problem there was that the
--files-from flag was unexpectedly slow, where in my case it was the solution to the slowdown!)
- Can anyone say if
copy --no-traverseis appropriate for my situation?
- Are there any minuses to using this flag?
- [Bonus question] Is this the default behavior for
copy? If not, why not?