I am trying to get two servers to copy each others data to the other server. I need it to be done real time a not use a cron. Can rsync running as a daemon monitor the files system to trigger a transmission? If so how do I configure it? I am running Solaris 9. Thank you. ______________________ Charles Berman Senior Unix Administrator "Think Globally" The contents of this email are the property of the sender. If it was not addressed to you, you have no legal right to read it. If you think you received it in error, please notify the sender. Do not forward or copy without permission of the sender.
To monitor the file system, you have to have something down inside the file system. Unless you know what you are doing, you don't really want to mess around with any such. Any slipup .... "copy each others data" Now if this means "an update to one implies an update to the other" that should be doable. If it means "a delete from one imples a delete from both" (me, I'm "brave and daring" but I wouldn't even try.) I can see two reasonable ways. 1) have an rsync daemon running on each server and a constantly running script on each server going either to or from the other server. 2) have an rsync daemon running on one server and a constantly running script on the other, alternately pushing and pulling. Regardless, -u (--update) is probably what you want. You may want to exclude rsync temporaries somehow (--exclude='.*' might be what you want) (Copying a temporary of a temporary after ... if (when) something goes down) You can get a wee bit of a mess if cron jobs start stepping on each other. No real damage other than producing multiple copies of dead temporaries.> -----Original Message----- > From: rsync-bounces+tony=servacorp.com@lists.samba.org > [mailto:rsync-bounces+tony=servacorp.com@lists.samba.org]On Behalf Of > Charles.Berman@pfpc.com > Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 2:47 PM > To: rsync@lists.samba.org > Subject: Can rsync monitor a file system? > > > > I am trying to get two servers to copy each others data to the other > server. > I need it to be done real time a not use a cron. > > Can rsync running as a daemon monitor the files system to trigger a > transmission? > > If so how do I configure it? > > I am running Solaris 9. > > Thank you. > > ______________________ > > Charles Berman > Senior Unix Administrator > > "Think Globally" > > > The contents of this email are the property of the sender. If it > was not addressed to you, you have no legal right to read it. If > you think you received it in error, please notify the sender. Do > not forward or copy without permission of the sender. > -- > To unsubscribe or change options: > https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync > Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Maybe you need Unison rather than rsync? http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/ -- Stuart Halliday ECS Technology ltd Registered in Scotland - #212513 -----Original Message----- From: Charles.Berman@pfpc.com To: rsync@lists.samba.org Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 15:47:17 -0400 Subject: Can rsync monitor a file system?> > I am trying to get two servers to copy each others data to the other > server. > I need it to be done real time a not use a cron. > > Can rsync running as a daemon monitor the files system to trigger a > transmission? > > If so how do I configure it? > > I am running Solaris 9. > > Thank you. > > ______________________ > > Charles Berman > Senior Unix Administrator
2006/6/27, Stuart Halliday <StuartH@ecs-tech.com>:> Maybe you need Unison rather than rsync? > > http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/Or if you are using Linux, drdb (http://www.drbd.org/)? Best Martin PS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting :-(
cbiedl@gmx.de wrote:> >Charles.Berman@pfpc.com wrote... > >> How would you set a cron to run every 30 seconds? >Otherwise it could work >> for me. > >With a start every 30 seconds you're in the high >risk an an overrun.Possibly saved by max connections =1 or such.>Don't do cron, use a simple shell script with >"while true; " and >"sleep 30". > >But believe me, this is a bad idea.I suspect you're right;) When things take off automatically on their own, you get troubles in places you didn't know you had places. Debris from failed transfers. Subtle errors that put an extra copy one level off. (mirror in a mirror, ... ... until you run out of ...) (and that's without knowing what I'm talking about) (Figure reality has several considerably worse ...) I think that handling deletes becomes a nightmare, or at least must be handled carefully and severly restricts the choices possible for updates.