search for: codeblu

You could probably use CIFS, NFS or sshfs.  It wouldn't be as fast, but the memory requirements should be less. Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: John Long <codeblue at inbox.lv> </div><div>Date:2016/03/25 04:10 (GMT-08:00) </div><div>To: rsync at lists.samba.org </div><div>Cc: </div><div>Subject: Re: Memory consumption for rsync -axv --delete </div><div> </div>On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 09:5...

Hi, I have been using rsync for over ten years. Thank you! It is a great tool. Recently I had the misfortune to have to use it to sync files to a USB stick that is for a platform that only supports FAT32. After missing the point a few times and having it copy some of the same directories and files needlessly I saw the timestamps on the source files (in reasonable filesystems like JFS, XFS,

Thanks a lot, Kevin. I have a new Linux box and tried to set it to UTC but I think gnome outsmarted me... I'll use -rt and maybe ignore timestamps entirely rather than the window. If I find something wrong on the USB stick I can always copy it again. I love the -c option, but it takes forever on slow media. John On Tue, 2018-01-16 at 13:27 -0500, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: > #1 yes,

Thanks I'll look this up. There is still the issue of how to get the target box cleaned up since I can no longer run --delete. /jl On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 02:49:02AM -0400, Kevin Korb wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > You miss-understand the purpose of --link-dest. Yes, it gives you > multiple complete backups, but each only consumes the disk space

Hi, On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 11:16:47AM -0400, Kevin Korb wrote: > If you were using --link-dest to make multiple backups you wouldn't > need --delete because the target is always a new empty directory (with > - --link-dest pointing to the previous backup run). The source is around 200G and the target box only has 500G total and some of it is used for other data. What I want to do

Hi, I have been using rsync for many years and never had any kind of problem. Lately I am running out of RAM trying to do an incremental backup to a box that only has 2G of RAM. The entire directory structure I'm mirroring is about 200G of files. A minority of subdirectories have many files. Is there a way to do an incremental backup with --delete option that does not use as much memory? Is