Started second backup configuration, but initial run makes no sense to me

#1

I’m new to duplicati as of yesterday. Still testing and learning. There’s much to like. My problem:

I setup and ran backup config. #1 - source files are ~170GB, so initial run took a long time.

Just now I set up a second, separate backup config - #2 - source files are ~16GB. Starting it, duplicati immediate displays this message: “Verifying backend data”.

It did not do this when I initially ran backup #1. What’s to verify? This config has never been run? What is duplicati doing, and why is it taking so long?

=====

UPDATE: Trial run of backup config #1 has concluded, with an error message:

“Error while running Thunderbird
Found 7615 remote files that are not recorded in local storage, please run repair”

(Thunderbird is the name of backup #2)

Wondering if this issue is caused by my telling backup #2 to store backups in the same directory as backup #1, I changed the destination for backup #2. It’s now running with no “verification” happening, unlike before, and I expect it to complete without error.

I keep having this thought: As a newcomer to duplicati, I keep finding lots of things I need to know that are not in the documentation. What if we had a user wiki so that this stuff could be easily accessed? For this problem I had today, I would go to said wiki and enter, in a section devoted to backup configurations: “Each named backup configuration must go to its own destination directory.”

Has this wiki idea any merit? I note that I find a lot of useful stuff searching the forum, but them make a note of it in my personal notes, where it does no one any good except me. That doesn’t seem like the best way to summarize and store this “craft knowledge” which goes beyond the official documentation. A user wiki seems like a better idea.

My perspective may be highly atypical. I’m not a computer professional, but a psychotherapist. I know far more about computers and software than anyone in my field I’ve ever met, but clearly am well below the level of knowledge of most if not all other members of this forum…so perhaps the wiki isn’t really needed for most folks.

Thoughts?

0 Likes

#2

Glad you found us and like what you see so far!

Yep - that’s exactly what it means. You CAN share multiple back jobs in a single directory, but to do so you have to use an advanced parameter that gives each backup job files their own prefix (instead of the default “duplicati” - though it’s not recommended due to how easy it is for people to get confused. There is a discussion about adding a “hey, you’ve already got a backup going there” check when setting up a job - but I don’t think it’s been implemented yet.

The problem with a wiki is that without a guiding hand, it easily ends up being a mismash of “this is what worked for me” entries - at which point you might as well be searching a forum like this one. That being said, it’s actually possible to make posts here editable by anybody “wiki-style” (for example, I believe the “Duplicati 2 vs. Duplicacy 2” post is set up this way).

There is a documentation file in process - while it’s not “complete” (whatever that means) yet, the author is happy to have people proof read and give suggestions.

1 Like

#3

First, thanks for responding. More than once, as the least informed participant in some technical software forum, I’ve just been overlooked. Yet my simple issues are just as blocking to me as others’ more complex issues. I appreciate your taking the time, and especially your offering such a useful response.

About the wiki, while I had not yet found the time to withdrawn my suggestion, I had certainly reconsidered it and found it wanting. Primarily, I came to realise that if it was a sound idea it surely would already exist. It doesn’t. Your comment seals the deal for me.

What does exist you have directed me to - the manual-in-progress, and I couldn’t be more delighted. By all appearances a fine work and most useful to me in so many ways. I’ll be giving it careful study.

For all, thank you so much.

2 Likes

#4

Indeed, @kees-z has done a great job on the “manual-to-be” - glad to hear you find it useful! :open_book:

From all, you are very welcome! :smiley:

1 Like