On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:04:48 +0530 piyush joshi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear All,
I want to exclude some files from the backup server. I got
this option --delete-excluded but i want to only exclude those files
which are older than one month from the current date and does not
Perhaps i've misunderstood what you're attempting to do; however, if
you simply want to exclude some files (not delete them), then you
should be using --exclude instead.
As far as the time requirement is concerned, you may wish to
consider generating the file listing ahead of time
On Mon 03 Dec 2007, piyush joshi wrote:
I am new to rsync command and i need your help .I have one
mail server I take the back up of mail server on backup server but what
happen all users delete there mail's from mail server but that does'nt
deleted from back up server after
And a performance question: would it be faster to pass the complete list
of
datafiles to rsync in one fell swoop, for instance using --files-from
rather
than running rsync individually on each one?
It would be somewhat faster to pass the entire list because you incur
the overhead of
I have been using the following syntax..
rsync -cvz /d01/app/testfile1.dbf tarser:/t01/app/testfile1.dbf
but I would change to the one below and test a 40 GB transfer and see the
results...
rsync -zv --no-whole-file --stats /d01/app/testfile2.dbf
tarser:/t01/app/testfile2.dbf
Yes,
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 06:40:20AM -0800, lsk wrote:
- with datafiles in dsetination takes more time
I assume you could use --whole-file instead of removing the destination
files manually.
..wayne..
--
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before
Wayne Davison wrote:
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 02:07:14PM -0500, Linus Hicks wrote:
I do not understand the exceeding long times shown in the last two
runs.
Since the user/sys CPU time didn't also mushroom, I would suggest that
you check to see if your system ran out of free memory and started
Linus Hicks wrote:
Wayne Davison wrote:
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 02:07:14PM -0500, Linus Hicks wrote:
I do not understand the exceeding long times shown in the last two
runs.
Since the user/sys CPU time didn't also mushroom, I would suggest that
you check to see if your system ran out of free
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 09:21:25AM -0500, Linus Hicks wrote:
I'm transferring one file, which is obvious from my command line. Is the
FAQ incorrect?
The FAQ is incomplete in how the size of the file can affect the sender's
memory. If the destination file already exists, the sender needs to be
Wayne Davison wrote:
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 09:21:25AM -0500, Linus Hicks wrote:
I'm transferring one file, which is obvious from my command line. Is the
FAQ incorrect?
The FAQ is incomplete in how the size of the file can affect the sender's
memory. If the destination file already exists,
--On Friday, March 03, 2006 9:21 AM -0500 Linus Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
This is certainly not true for the source machine. It typically has 70gb
free (it's still running a 32-bit Oracle database server). The
destination machine started out with about 2.8gb free. I will run it
again and
Carson Gaspar wrote:
--On Friday, March 03, 2006 9:21 AM -0500 Linus Hicks lihicks at gpi dot com
Please configure your email client to not quote email addresses...
wrote:
This is certainly not true for the source machine. It typically has 70gb
free (it's still running a 32-bit Oracle
Here's my contribution to information on performance. There are two different
cases. The first is a 1.6gb file that has a low volume of updates. The second
case is a 4gb file that has a high volume. All are non-local transfers. I do not
understand the exceeding long times shown in the last two
Linus, I was looking at your 1.6 GB rsync transfers, the initial copy
without that file on the destination is faster than that of using
--inplace and not using inplace option. I also came across the same
results but still I am trying with some other datafiles to again confirm.
All the tests i
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 02:07:14PM -0500, Linus Hicks wrote:
I do not understand the exceeding long times shown in the last two
runs.
Since the user/sys CPU time didn't also mushroom, I would suggest that
you check to see if your system ran out of free memory and started to
thrash as memory was
Matt McCutchen wrote:
On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 06:58 -0800, lsk wrote:
Could you give an example with syntax for rsync using file
option --files-rom=FILE.
If my-list in the current directory contains
a
b
b/c
b/d
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 11:08 -0800, lsk wrote:
I have been using the following syntax..
rsync -cvz /d01/app/testfile1.dbf tarser:/t01/app/testfile1.dbf
but I would change to the one below and test a 40 GB transfer and see the
results...
rsync -zv --no-whole-file --stats
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 11:08 -0800, lsk wrote:
I have been using the following syntax..
rsync -cvz /d01/app/testfile1.dbf tarser:/t01/app/testfile1.dbf
but I would change to the one below and test a 40 GB transfer and see the
results...
rsync -zv --no-whole-file --stats
On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 09:20 -0500, Linus Hicks wrote:
rsync -a srchost:/ / --files-from=dbf-list
and dbf-list would contain this:
p02/oradata/OSID/redo01.log
p03/oradata/OSID/redo02.log
p04/oradata/OSID/redo03.log
p01/oradata/OSID/system01.dbf
p04/oradata/OSID/undotbs01.dbf
On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 07:43 -0800, lsk wrote:
Matt I have strange results to report I transferred 300 oracle datafiles of
total 30 GB in size. Using the option rsync -zv --no-whole-file --stats
it took 1:15 min and using rsync -cvz options earlier had took 1:25 min so
there wasn't much time
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 07:45:20AM -0800, lsk wrote:
Matt I have strange results to report I transferred 300 oracle datafiles of
total 30 GB in size. Using the option rsync -zv --no-whole-file --stats
it took 1:15 min and using rsync -cvz options earlier had took 1:25 min so
there wasn't
Matt McCutchen wrote:
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 18:40 -0500, Linus Hicks wrote:
I did something similar to what lsk is doing a few months back, I believe using
rsync 2.6.5. I wrote a script to query the database for all the datafiles and
rsync'ed them individually by specifying the full path to
And a performance question: would it be faster to pass the complete list of
datafiles to rsync in one fell swoop, for instance using --files-from
rather
than running rsync individually on each one?
It would be somewhat faster to pass the entire list because you incur
the overhead of
On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 06:58 -0800, lsk wrote:
Could you give an example with syntax for rsync using file
option --files-rom=FILE.
If my-list in the current directory contains
a
b
b/c
b/d
b/d/e ,
then the command
I am back with the results..here are the options I tried on a 7.0 GB file.
=No file on target (rm the file on the target and rsync) with rsync -czv
it took 1 hr.
=File on target with but header info change on source with rsync -czv it
took 40 min
=File on target with but header info change on
Hello,
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 05:58 -0800, lsk wrote:
I am back with the results..here are the options I tried on a 7.0 GB file.
=No file on target (rm the file on the target and rsync) with rsync -czv
it took 1 hr.
=File on target with but header info change on source with rsync -czv it
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 05:58:26AM -0800, lsk wrote:
2) And Matt could explain little more on what do you mean by atomicity
What he meant is that, without --inplace, rsync creates an updated file
and moves it into place, making the update atomic (i.e. none of the
destination files are ever in a
Wayne Davison-2 wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 05:58:26AM -0800, lsk wrote:
2) And Matt could explain little more on what do you mean by atomicity
What he meant is that, without --inplace, rsync creates an updated file
and moves it into place, making the update atomic (i.e. none of the
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 11:08 -0800, lsk wrote:
/// lsk:- Thanks for the clarification Wayne, in my case no one
would be allowed to use the destination file until the process is
complete. As soon as my destination server is upgraded to the newer
version of rsync which supports --inplace
Matt McCutchen wrote:
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 11:08 -0800, lsk wrote:
/// lsk:- Thanks for the clarification Wayne, in my case no one
would be allowed to use the destination file until the process is
complete. As soon as my destination server is upgraded to the newer
version of rsync
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 18:40 -0500, Linus Hicks wrote:
I did something similar to what lsk is doing a few months back, I believe
using
rsync 2.6.5. I wrote a script to query the database for all the datafiles and
rsync'ed them individually by specifying the full path to the file. What I
Matt McCutchen wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 11:43 -0800, lsk wrote:
Currently I use rsync -czv c for checksum.
If each data file's first few bytes (header information) change
between rsync transfers, then --checksum buys you nothing. Normally
rsync will skip transferring a file if the
On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 14:32 -0500, Linus Hicks wrote:
At a minimum, when an Oracle database is opened and closed, the timestamps on
all datafiles will be updated because the header blocks will get updated with
a
new SCN. So the timestamps on all datafiles will always look different the
Hi Isk,
Please see embedded.
Gian
lsk wrote:
Hello,
I was reading your posts about RSYNC. We have a massive Oracle schema lots
of datafiles about 750 GB size. We do rsync datafiles from source to target
server but everytime we cleanup the datafiles on the target server and do
rsync
Gian,
What do you mean by cleanup the datafiles on the target server? Are
you editing files on the target server?
lsk: That means I delete/rm the files from the target and then start rsync.
If the target is not 100% different from the source, yes, keep it!
Rsync will upload the
On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 11:43 -0800, lsk wrote:
lsk: This is oracle database the header information(timestamp..etc) on each
datafile constantly changes which might be very small change but the data
inside most of the datafiles are same they wont change much. New oracle
datafiles will be added on
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 08:09:06AM +0200, Tibor V wrote:
I need to populate folder1 [website] with folder2 [blueprints], that
is for webpage.
I'm sorry, your question was too vague for me to be able to figure out
exactly what you are trying to do. Rsync works like a normal copy
command in many
Title: Rsync help
What
version of rsync? What operating system? What version of the OS? What is the
phase of the moon? C'mon, give us more clues. :-)
PG
-Original Message-From: Walgamotte, David
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002
12:38 PMTo: '[EMAIL
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 01:13:19PM -0500, Green, Paul wrote:
What version of rsync? What operating system? What version of the OS? What
is the phase of the moon? C'mon, give us more clues. :-)
PG
-Original Message-
From: Walgamotte, David [mailto:david.walgamotte;wild.net]
Title: RE: Rsync help
SUN box, 2gig ram, hard drive space to spare. Rsync 2.5.5, solaris 5.7 version 7.
Half moon, I think it only seems to work on full moon nights.
Here's the command I run as well .
/usr/local/bin/rsync --delete --partial -P -p -z -e /usr/local/bin/ssh /dir1
SUN box, 2gig ram, hard drive space to spare. Rsync 2.5.5, solaris 5.7
version 7.
Half moon, I think it only seems to work on full moon nights.
Here's the command I run as well .
/usr/local/bin/rsync --delete --partial -P -p -z -e /usr/local/bin/ssh /dir1
systemname:/storage
[snip]
On 25 Apr 2002, Dave Dykstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did you mean rsync's call to chroot, or a chroot around the whole
invocation of rsync? Rsync's chroot doesn't happen until after the uid =
in rsyncd.conf is processed, so that still works without copying in the
passwd file.
Oh, quite
On 22 Apr 2002, Sonu Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i get the following error:
@ERROR: invalid uid rsync
You probably have a line like
uid = rsync
in the server's rsyncd.conf, but there's no such user defined on the
server. If you're using a chroot jail, then the passwd file inside
the
43 matches
Mail list logo
