samba-bugs at samba.org
2014-Nov-25 22:58 UTC
[Bug 10963] New: rsync to multiple destinations
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963
Bug ID: 10963
Summary: rsync to multiple destinations
Product: rsync
Version: 3.0.6
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: core
Assignee: wayned at samba.org
Reporter: Dave at Yost.com
QA Contact: rsync-qa at samba.org
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963 --- Comment #1 from Dave Yost <Dave at Yost.com> --- Something like this would be useful: rsync foo s1: --add-destinations s2:dir s3:dir or rsync foo s1: --to s1: s2:dir s3:~ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963 --- Comment #2 from Kevin Korb <rsync at sanitarium.net> --- These would be separate rsync (and ssh) connections. What use case would justify bundling them together into a single rsync session? The only benefit over multiple exections of rsync would be a lack of per-session error handling. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963 --- Comment #3 from Dave Yost <Dave at Yost.com> --- What I'm after is an argument syntax that supports copying to multiple destinations. It's fine by me if rsync executes a multiple-destination command via multiple, sequential copies. I am not advocating an incompatible change that would require a --to argument even for a single destination. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
How would this be different/better than
rsync options source {dest1 dest2 dest3}
? (The brackets cause bash to repeat the command line for each argument
inside the brackets.)
The only thing I can see is what Kevin pointed out about figuring out
which transfer was involved if an error condition results, but this
would probably also be the case with the requested option.
If there was some advantage to running them in parallel, throwing an
ampersand on the end of the command line would probably do it.
Joe
On 11/25/2014 06:00 PM, samba-bugs at samba.org wrote:> https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963
>
> --- Comment #1 from Dave Yost <Dave at Yost.com> ---
> Something like this would be useful:
> rsync foo s1: --add-destinations s2:dir s3:dir
> or
> rsync foo s1: --to s1: s2:dir s3:~
>
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963 --- Comment #4 from Kevin Korb <rsync at sanitarium.net> --- If you want to run them in parallel then use gnu parallel. It would keep the specified unmber of jobs running until it runs out of new jobs. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963 --- Comment #5 from Dave Yost <Dave at Yost.com> --- This is not about running them in parallel. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.