Re: Is there a better way to transfer data that doesn't use so much cache?

2022-08-08 Thread Rob Campbell via rsync
I've decided to rewrite the script and use cp and mv rather than rsync. In the past, I've had some lost data using just cp and mv which is why I moved to rsync to put the data into a staging directory. Now that I've been creating more data (newer cameras with higher megapixel files and more

Re: Is there a better way to transfer data that doesn't use so much cache?

2022-08-04 Thread Wayne Davison via rsync
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 7:10 PM Dan Stromberg wrote: > However, if you transfer a large amount of data and do not intend to > retransmit that data any time soon, then the memory isn't really put to > good use, and can actually cause your system to slow down significantly - > particularly if

Re: Is there a better way to transfer data that doesn't use so much cache?

2022-08-03 Thread Dan Stromberg via rsync
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 5:41 PM Robin Lee Powell via rsync < rsync@lists.samba.org> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 02:04:22PM -0400, Rob Campbell via rsync wrote: > > The problem isn't that there are many syncs because the problem happens > on > > the first one that runs. > > You didn't actually

Re: Is there a better way to transfer data that doesn't use so much cache?

2022-08-03 Thread Robin Lee Powell via rsync
On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 02:04:22PM -0400, Rob Campbell via rsync wrote: > I've created a script that syncs (and removes) data from as many as 4 > places and puts them all in one of 2 directories. The commands are: > > rsync -avt --progress --remove-source-files --info=progress2 -f'+ *.nef' >