On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 19:01 -0400, John Abreau wrote: > On 3/22/07, Python <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Yes. But if it is like dirvish, one changed record means a whole new > > mysql.sql in the daily snapshot directory. rdiff would presumably store > > a delta saving space and allowing finer grained recovery points within a > > given disk quota. > > > > I haven't looked at rdiff since 1998, but back then, I inherited a > system that was using rdiff to replicate a development environment > hosted in Mountain View to a remote office in Marlboro every night, > and rdiff was taking about 20 hours to complete the job. > > Somebody told me about rsync when we were at the Cambridge > Brewery after a BLU meeting, and I gave it a try the next day. I > found that rsync completed the same job in less than two hours. > > Has rdiff really changed that much over the years? Or is it a whole > new protocol that just reused an old name?
It looks like a different project using the old name. The web site says it uses librsync, so the performance should be comparable to what you are used to. -- Lloyd Kvam Venix Corp _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
