search for: hardlinking

Hi, I detected a silly behaviour of rsync when new hardlinks of already synced files are created: Scenario: There are a local directory and a equal remote directory created by former run of rsync. Create a hardlink from a already existing file (both inside the local directory). If this hardlink has a filename with comes before the original filename when both are sorted in alphabetic order,

[please Cc: 666024-forwarded at bugs.debian.org on any replies, thanks] Please see the attached Debian bug report, which includes a helpful bug-reproducing shell script; I've confirmed this still happens with 3.0.9. Paul Slootman On Tue 27 Mar 2012, Ian Jackson wrote: > Package: rsync > Version: 3.0.7-2 > > With rsync --link-dest, if two different source files (not hardlinked

On 30 Nov 2015, at 10:21, Gionatan Danti <g.danti at assyoma.it> wrote: > > So, let me do a straigth question: is someone using dovecot/LMTP with hardlinking? To me, this seems a _very_ important feature, and I wonder if I am doing something wrong or if the feature (hardlink+sieve) simply does not exists. Hardlink+Sieve has never worked. The fix is a bit complicated. Here's my TODO entry about it: - remove mail_deliver_session after all, do all t...

Hi list, many moons ago I asked about preserving hardlink between identical messages when pigeonhole (for sieve filtering) was used. The reply was that, while hardlink worked well for non-filtered messages, using pigeonhole broke the hardlink (ie: some message-specific data was appended to the actual mail file). Here you can find the original thread:

There is a small configure glitch for rsync-2.5.5rc1 on Apple Darwin (== MacOS X) [ uname -a Darwin darwin.math.utah.edu 5.2 Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001; root:xnu/xnu-201.14.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc ] the config.h file gets the line #define INET6 1 The link then fails with /usr/bin/ld: Undefined symbols: _freehostent _getipnodebyaddr

Hi, hardlinking (-H) works perfectly while using a syntax like -avhxSDH <SRC> <DEST> Now I have to mirror multiple SRC directories which contain hardlinks. e. g: src1/a is a hardlink to src2/b -RavhxSDH SRC1 SRC2 DEST does not preserve hardlink a and b in DEST. Is there any chance to do that? Thank...

> centos 7.x is latest, so if you need help upgrade make a bug report to > centos, not waste your time here since you choiced a precompiled > problem, reporting here 7s helpfull if you use dovecot compiled with > the latest version here, this migth be a unknown bug you then have > found, but not if you use precompiled problems, then report to the > maintainers of such software

Hi all, I have some questions about hardlinks, alternate storage and compression. I already scanned the list for related information and I have an idea of how things works, but I would like to have a definite answer. System spec: - CentOS 6.6 x64 - dovecot-2.0.9-8.el6_6.4.x86_64 RPM package/version - sdbox mail store 1) About hardlinks: when sending the same message to two different

Il 23-12-2019 12:04 Gionatan Danti ha scritto: > On 19/12/19 11:08, Gionatan Danti wrote: >> Hi list, >> many moons ago I asked about preserving hardlink between identical >> messages when pigeonhole (for sieve filtering) was used. >> >> The reply was that, while hardlink worked well for non-filtered >> messages, using pigeonhole broke the hardlink (ie:

Hi Javier, thanks for your reply. I already checked SIS and, while interesting, is not what I want, because: 1) it can be difficult to restore a single message/attachment from a backup 2) only the attachments, and not the entire messages, are deduped. Message-based hardlinks really exists for a reason. The good news is that I found _why_ they are not working: it depends from how dovecot and

I'm copying a partition that has a bunch of hardlink based snapshots (-aPH). I think there's about 250,000 files in each backup and between 100 and 200 snapshots. Earlier today, I saw the files had completed and it was making all the hardlinks. I thought it would be "not long" but it's been making hardlinks for 12 hours (at least). There's only 36Gb in snapshot, the

Hi all, I have some updates on the hard-link discussion. First, let me explain that I installed a test machine with CentOS 7.1 and dovecot/pigeonhole version 2.2.10-4 and the results where identical on what I had on CentOS 6.7 and dovecot 2.0.9-19 The bottom line is that hardlinking works only when no, or at most only one, RCPT have sieve filtering. For example: - if no RCPT has sieve filters, hardlink is OK - if only one RCPT has sieve filters, hardlink is OK - if two or more RCPTs have sieve filters, hardlink is NOT working. Some time ago I reported that, when disabling th...

The rsync 2.5.6 TODO file mentions the need for hard link test cases. Here is one in which a linked file is unnecessarily transferred in full. # Setup initial directories mkdir src dest dd if=/dev/zero bs=1024 count=10000 of=src/a 2>/dev/null rsync -a src/. dest/. ln src/a src/b # At this point, a & b exist in src; only a exists in dest. rsync -aHv src/. dest/.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9749 Summary: hardlinkes files are copies instat of make a link Product: rsync Version: 3.0.9 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: dieter.ferdinand at

I'm running a mirror of several repositories that are fetched using separate rsync runs. Since some of those repositories are hosting related files, I'm using the hardlink utility[1] in order to save disk space. However, I've noticed an issue that may lead to potential file metadata inconsistencies when using hardlink. Consider the following scenario: - two repositories (rep_a and

Hello, I have an el-cheapo shared hosting account on Dreamhost, and have had it for a very long time. For the most part everything usually works fairly well, considering I do keep a lot of folders, and mail, on some of my accounts. They are running dovecot, but still don't have a response as to the version, or doveconf -n output yet. My problem is, one of my most used folders, which was

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rsync 3.0.9 here. I am using a rsync script like: """ rsync -z --numeric-ids -a -H --inplace --delete --delete-excluded - --stats --progress -v --itemize-changes SOURCE DESTINATION """ I detected the following issue when RSYNCing a bunch of Mercurial repositories. It is very dangerous, because it will corrupt files.

On 14/07/15 08:17, Steffen Kaiser wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Mon, 13 Jul 2015, Gionatan Danti wrote: > >> On the other hand, private (per-user) sieve file works without >> interfering with hardlinks. In a similar manner, disabling sieve also >> permits dovecot to create multiple hardlinks for a single message. >> >>

Hi! It's me again with another --link-dest issue: I am using dirvish (www.dirvish.org) to create daily backup on disk images. dirvish is using rsync with --link-dest pointing to the last good image. This creates images with hardlinks to unmodified files. So far so good. Now I want to create a "current" filetree with hardlinks pointing to the last image. rsync -vaH --delete

Hi list, I have a little script that uses rysnc and hardlink to perform backups. Some days ago a friend told me that rsync could crash if the hardlink limit is reached. I know (and tested) that for ext4 the max number of hardlink for a single file is 65000 but I can't get a limit on XFS. Due to the fact that I can't get good resources from google search, I tried to reach its limit