I know this question is a little dated, but at my company we've been experimenting with something similar. We've been pulling xml-formatted backups (not from MySQL, but still simply text files) that are ~300 MB in size and committing them to an SVN repository, every night for a little over a week. The first commit put the repository at 41 MB, but each commit since has been smaller. We are now at revision 8, and the total size of the repository is a scant 57 MB. This is about 2.5% of the size of all of the history it contains!
I just tried out rdiff-backup using the same data; below is a comparison (all sizes in MB):
Backup # Backup Size repo size delta rdiff size delta 0 0 0.03 0.03 0 0 1 286.05 41.49 41.46 286.05 286.05 2 285.93 45.97 4.49 322.13 36.08 3 286.23 50.52 4.54 323.27 1.14 4 286.63 50.79 0.27 324.54 1.26 5 287.46 55.52 4.73 326.54 2.00 6 287.76 55.77 0.25 327.72 1.19 7 288.15 56.14 0.37 328.98 1.26 8 288.41 56.63 0.50 330.36 1.38
Looks like the deltas are about the same (sometimes svn is better, sometimes rdiff-backup is), so on overall size, SVN wins. An advantage to rdiff is that it is easy to remove old backups, where with SVN you would have to do an svnadmin dump and svnadmin load to get rid of old revisions. I guess it's a matter of preference but SVN is easy to use, and has a ton of tools around to support it.