Felipe Alvarez
2010-Feb-24 22:59 UTC
why more than one temp file for a single rsync download?
A large file (2+ GB) needs to be transfered, but I see more than one temp file for it. One temp file is larger than the other, but this morning I tried to rsync again, and it DID NOT resume the largest temp file - it resumed the smaller one. Is there an explanation of this behaviour? I didn't want --inplace because I don't need it (I have the disk space). - -rw-r--r-- 1 felipe users 2137544747 2010-02-24 07:05 en_windows_7_professional_x86_dvd_x15-65804.iso -rw------- 1 felipe users 2425356288 2010-02-25 03:53 .en_windows_7_professional_x86_dvd_x15-65804.iso.FRqmSF -rw------- 1 felipe users 2206466048 2010-02-25 08:55 .en_windows_7_professional_x86_dvd_x15-65804.iso.H4iErJ -rw-r--r-- 1 felipe users 90 2010-02-24 23:46 en_windows_7_professional_x86_dvd_x15-65804.iso.sha1 - The original is - -rw-r--r-- 1 felipe users 2501894144 2009-08-06 20:57 en_windows_7_professional_x86_dvd_x15-65804.iso - Why are two temp files saved here? Why did it resume the smaller one? What should I do to avoid this in the future? Felipe
Carlos Carvalho
2010-Feb-25 03:52 UTC
why more than one temp file for a single rsync download?
Felipe Alvarez (felipe.alvarez at gmail.com) wrote on 25 February 2010 08:59: >A large file (2+ GB) needs to be transfered, but I see more than one >temp file for it. One temp file is larger than the other, but this >morning I tried to rsync again, and it DID NOT resume the largest temp >file - it resumed the smaller one. Is there an explanation of this >behaviour? I didn't want --inplace because I don't need it (I have the >disk space). >- >-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe users 2137544747 2010-02-24 07:05 en_windows_7_professional_x86_dvd_x15-65804.iso >-rw------- 1 felipe users 2425356288 2010-02-25 03:53 .en_windows_7_professional_x86_dvd_x15-65804.iso.FRqmSF >-rw------- 1 felipe users 2206466048 2010-02-25 08:55 .en_windows_7_professional_x86_dvd_x15-65804.iso.H4iErJ >-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe users 90 2010-02-24 23:46 en_windows_7_professional_x86_dvd_x15-65804.iso.sha1 >- >The original is >- >-rw-r--r-- 1 felipe users 2501894144 2009-08-06 20:57 en_windows_7_professional_x86_dvd_x15-65804.iso >- >Why are two temp files saved here? Probably because the previous two transfers were aborted. Normally rsync removes the temporary if at all possible; it's only left if the interruption was forceful, such as kill -9 or a machine crash. >Why did it resume the smaller one? It didn't. It started from the same point all 3 times. So, if the file didn't exist in the destination the 3 transfers started from zero. The temporary is not used, rsync behaves as if it doesn't exist. Which means it's not removed either, unless you do a recursive run with --delete. >What should I do to avoid this in the future? If you use --partial and an interruption happens rsync moves the temporary to the final name and uses it next time to speed up the update. However if the interruption doesn't give rsync the opportunity to move the temporary, as happened to you, nothing can be done.
Wayne Davison
2010-Mar-06 17:27 UTC
why more than one temp file for a single rsync download?
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Felipe Alvarez <felipe.alvarez at gmail.com>wrote:> A large file (2+ GB) needs to be transfered, but I see more than one > temp file for it.If you're using 2.6.8, upgrade to a newer version -- it has a bug where an interrupted transfer could leave a temp file lying around. ..wayne.. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/rsync/attachments/20100306/5bfcfe11/attachment.html>