On Wed 01 Aug 2007, Wayne Davison wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 04:02:03PM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> > The text in the description of the --append option may lead one to
> > believe that files that are shorter on the receiving side won't be
> > updated, due to the following text:
>
> Tha
Hi
I have a single filesystem i don't mount noatime because mutt would work
very good otherwise.
Today, in a discussion about mkisofs, i learned that Linux since 2.6.8
supports "O_NOATIME" as an option to open. (see "man 2 open")
So how comes that rsync doesn't do that and/or there is no opti
On 8/2/07, Paul Slootman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I thought that --append simply meant that in cases where the destination
> file is shorter, data is simply appended without first checksumming the
> existing data, but that transfers would otherwise not be affected in any
> way, i.e. be performe
On Thu 02 Aug 2007, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On 8/2/07, Paul Slootman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I thought that --append simply meant that in cases where the destination
> > file is shorter, data is simply appended without first checksumming the
> > existing data, but that transfers would otherw
On 8/2/07, Matthias Schniedermeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a single filesystem i don't mount noatime because mutt would work
> very good otherwise.
IMHO, mutt is broken for relying on atimes because other programs
reading the mailbox will cause mutt to miss new mail. It would be
silly
since when rsync and samba are together?
--
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
On Thu 02 Aug 2007, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On 8/2/07, Matthias Schniedermeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have a single filesystem i don't mount noatime because mutt would work
> > very good otherwise.
>
> IMHO, mutt is broken for relying on atimes because other programs
> reading the mailbo
On 8/2/07, Paul Slootman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Oddly, rsync does checksum the existing data. At first I thought this
>
> Only after the transfer is complete, no? Not during, as it does
> normally.
Yes, during. Note the big "if (append_mode > 0)" block in match_sums
in match.c . It's mu
On Thu 02 Aug 2007, boricua wrote:
> since when rsync and samba are together?
rsync and samba are separate projects, but the author of samba, Andrew
Tridgell, wrote it (together with Paul Mackerras, who I'm sure also
worked on samba). Hence rsync is hosted on samba.org.
At least, that's now I u
Hi all.
I once tried to rsync around 100 GB (10 million files), but version
2.6.6 needed too much RAM and was too slow.
Is one of the snapshots stable enough to try this again?
Greetings
Sven
pgp2q99V2fn3K.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.
On Thu 02 Aug 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I once tried to rsync around 100 GB (10 million files), but version
> 2.6.6 needed too much RAM and was too slow.
I believe 2.6.7 had a number of memory-saving options; each subsequent
version will of course have other improvements. 2.6.9 is the cu
If those files don't have hardlinks (or you're not interested
in preserving hardlinks), you can greatly improve performance
by trying the 3.0.0 cvs snapshot.
Which suggests that the current CVS version won't preserve hardlinks?
--
Best regards,
Charles
--
To unsubscribe or change options: htt
On 8/2/07, Charles Marcus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If those files don't have hardlinks (or you're not interested
> > in preserving hardlinks), you can greatly improve performance
> > by trying the 3.0.0 cvs snapshot.
>
> Which suggests that the current CVS version won't preserve hardlinks?
N
On Thu 02 Aug 2007, Charles Marcus wrote:
> >If those files don't have hardlinks (or you're not interested
> >in preserving hardlinks), you can greatly improve performance
> >by trying the 3.0.0 cvs snapshot.
>
> Which suggests that the current CVS version won't preserve hardlinks?
No, which sug
Wayne,
Sven's note made me curious about how much incremental recursion
actually reduces memory usage, so I'm asking: How much of the file
list do the rsync processes hold in memory at any one time in
incremental recursion mode? Just the active file-list chunk(s) and
their ancestors? Or does rsy
On 02.08.2007 09:32, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On 8/2/07, Matthias Schniedermeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have a single filesystem i don't mount noatime because mutt would work
> > very good otherwise.
>
> IMHO, mutt is broken for relying on atimes because other programs
> reading the mailb
On 8/2/07, Matthias Schniedermeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I once wrote to the mutt-maillinglist why mutt doesn't set atime
> explicitly, so that it works even on noatime-mounted filesystems, but i
> was totally ignored. Maybe that question was just stupid.
Setting the atime explicitly makes
The issue is that asking to preserve hardlinks turns off incremental
recursion mode, which was what gives the performance benefit.
Ahh... ok, sorry...
--
Best regards,
Charles
--
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.
On 8/2/07, Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then declare the variable in sender.c and
> modify the do_open call in send_files to pass NO_ATIME if the variable
> is true.
Oops, I meant O_NOATIME, as you probably guessed.
Matt
--
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org
On 02.08.2007 11:57, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> > Could you give me a hint, so i can patch my local rsync?
>
> Add the option (--o_noatime or whatever you want to call it) in all
> the appropriate places in options.c, including a variable to store
> whether the option is on. Then declare the variab
Greetings,
Would you have a full or upgrade version for sale or Premiere 6.5 for
MAC.
I am living in South Africa.
Many thanks
Best regards,
Markus
--
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-quest
hi, I having problems with a knowed bug in rsync, it hangs during
transfers in the SFU version (services for unix), I read in this page
http://www.mail-archive.com/rsync@lists.samba.org/msg18807.html
that if I use the --no-ir option in the rsync 3.0 version, it will
avoid the hang bug...
the pro
On 8/2/07, User of web Forum. Crafta.com <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi, I having problems with a knowed bug in rsync, it hangs during
> transfers in the SFU version (services for unix), I read in this page
> http://www.mail-archive.com/rsync@lists.samba.org/msg18807.html
> that if I use the --no
On 8/2/07, Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> $ cd rsync-2.6.9.tar.gz
Oops, I meant `cd rsync-2.6.9' as you probably guessed.
Matt
--
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 06:24:10PM -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On 7/19/07, Paul Cui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > hi, All.
> >
> > I just compiled the latest rsync (2.6.9). but I'm getting an error when
> > I use the -C option.
> > eg:
> > $ rsync -aCv host1:/home/john/data/ /home/john/data
> >
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4855
--- Comment #2 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-02 20:06 CST ---
Created an attachment (id=2851)
--> (https://bugzilla.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=2851&action=view)
avoid crash (rsync 3.0.0cvs)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.sa
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4855
--- Comment #1 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-02 20:06 CST ---
Created an attachment (id=2850)
--> (https://bugzilla.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=2850&action=view)
quick fix to avoid crash
I've attached patches for rsync 2.6.9 and 3.0.0
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4855
Summary: skipped local filters cause segfault while deleting (-
rFR --delete)
Product: rsync
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: x86
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Sever
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:20:09AM -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> How much of the file list do the rsync processes hold in memory at any
> one time in incremental recursion mode?
It currently stores all directores that are encountered during the run
(though this might be optimized away in the futu
29 matches
Mail list logo
