On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:28:21 -0700 jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The referenced mail message describes the benchmark as:
> | The directory backed up or restored had 1 1-byte files
>
> That isn't a very good benchmark. 10,000 files is not that
> many and being 1 byte means that all t
On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 07:46:05PM -0700, Ben Escoto wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:05:09 -0700 jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Rsync is not an efficient local copy utility. It can be
> > used for local copying but local and high-bandwidth network
> > speed is sacrificed for low-bandwid
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:05:09 -0700 jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rsync is not an efficient local copy utility. It can be
> used for local copying but local and high-bandwidth network
> speed is sacrificed for low-bandwidth performance and for
> data integrity.
I've been surprised at how
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Dag Wieers wrote:
> Using rsync-2.5.6 I get the exact same error:
>
> building file list ...
> 28844 files to consider
> apt/packages/
> apt/packages/avifile/
> apt/packages/avifile/avifile-0.7.34-1.dag.rh90.i386.rpm
> rsync: writefd_unbuf
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Dag Wieers wrote:
> I'm having a problem rsyncing one file (since I signed it). It seems that
> the content of a file is able to cause problems in the protocol.
>
> building file list ...
> 28820 files to consider
> apt/packages/avifile/
> apt/packag
Hi,
I'm having a problem rsyncing one file (since I signed it). It seems that
the content of a file is able to cause problems in the protocol.
building file list ...
28820 files to consider
apt/packages/avifile/
apt/packages/avifile/avifile-0.7.34-1.dag.rh90.i386
