samba-bugs at samba.org
2010-Dec-12 18:22 UTC
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7862] New: hard-links and incremental recursion: unclear what happens
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7862
Summary: hard-links and incremental recursion: unclear what
happens
Product: rsync
Version: 3.0.7
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: core
AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org
ReportedBy: stepheng+samba at gildea.com
QAContact: rsync-qa at samba.org
I find the following sentence from the rsync 3.0.7 manual page
discussion of --hard-links to be unclear:
[incremental recursion] does not affect the accuracy of the
transfer, just its efficiency.
Does that mean ...
1) The transfer will be less efficient because rsync will transfer the
contents of the file, only to discover later that the transfer was
unnecessary, at which point it will toss the transferred data and
hard-link the file, leaving the file system an accurate duplicate of
the source, or ...
2) The file contents will be accurately copied into a new file, and
you will lose the space efficiency of having the hard link.
I read this as (1) and was happy, but the behavior seems to be (2).
Whichever the implementation does, please clarify the documentation.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
samba-bugs at samba.org
2011-Jan-02 02:23 UTC
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7862] hard-links and incremental recursion: unclear what happens
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7862
wayned at samba.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
------- Comment #1 from wayned at samba.org 2011-01-01 20:23 CST -------
I've clarified this a bit more in the latest docs (that the reading is
indeed
"1").
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
Reasonably Related Threads
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 6719] New: I/O error protection is broken w/ protocol 30 and incremental recursion
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 5266] New: Duplicate "not creating new directory" output w/ incremental recursion
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 5091] New: Incremental-recursive, list-only "rsync --delete" tries to clean out working dir
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 6362] New: --dry-run conflicts with --hard-links
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 5199] New: Exclusion of source arg ancestor short-circuits recursion