On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 08:53, va_public wrote: > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Donovan Baarda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 05:55, va_public wrote: > > > > RSYNC DOES NOT WORK WITH 1GB+ FILES... unless you have a > sufficiently > > large block size. See the following; > > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/rsync@l.../msg05219.html > > OK. I read the thread. Pretty interesting design discussion on rsync > internals. > > Has any of it been implemented in 2.5.6? When is it planned to > implement it? > > So, bottom line, you are telling me, dont use rsync for my Oracle > database backups? > > Thats a bummer. Oracle database files are pretty sparse and, at a > block level, very few things change, so I was hoping that > using 'rsync' instead of 'rcp' to do my daily backups would be > IMMENSELY faster.
If you notice, the critical thing in the formula is the number of _different_ bytes.... not really the whole file size. If you know less than 100M of the file is different, then use the block size recommended for a 100M file. For oracle database files, you probably also want to use a block size that is a multiple of whatever internal unit size oracle uses. > As per the final messages on the thread, just increasing the csum > from 2 to 4 bytes seemed to miraculously solve the problem, right? So > why isnt this patch being included? because it breaks backwards compatibility with older rsync versions... it needs a protocol version change which is a bit trickier to introduce without causing problems. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ABO: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info, including pgp key ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html