search for: m829

Considering you cant INCLUDE a directory that is a symlink... which would be really handy right now for me to resolve a mapping of 103 -> meaningful_name for backups, instead im resorting to temporary bind mounts of 103 onto meaningful_name, and when the bind mount isnt there, the --del is emptying meaningful_name accidentally at times. I think both situations could benefit from a

This has been a consideration. But it pains me that a tiny change/addition to the rsync option set would save much time and space for other legit use cases. We know rsync very well, we dont know ZFS very well (licensing kept the tech out of our linux-centric operations). We've been using it but we're not experts yet. Thanks for the suggestion. /kc On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 12:07:05PM

On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 02:05:50PM +0100, Simon Hobson said: >As I read this, the default is to look at the file size/timestamp and if they match then do nothing as they are assumed to be identical. So unless you have specified this, then files which have already been copied should be ignored - the check should be quite low in CPU, at least compared to the "cost" of

Hello, I ran the following commands: rsync /tmp/foo remote: rsync remote:/tmp/foo . On the remote computer, the following commands were executed: rsync --server -e.LsfxC . . rsync --server --sender -e.LsfxC . /tmp/foo Does anyone know, what is the meaning of the three dots/periods in the above two commands? The first command ends with two dots (". .") and the second command has one

And what's performance like? I've heard lots of COW systems performance drops through the floor when there's many snapshots. /kc On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 08:59:25AM +0200, Paul Slootman said: >On Mon 13 Jul 2015, Andrew Gideon wrote: >> >> On the other hand, I do confess that I am sometimes miffed at the waste >> involved in a small change to a very

...t ZFS requires considerable hardware resources (CPU & memory) to perform well. It also requires you to learn a whole new terminology to wrap your head around it. It's certainly not a trivial swap to say the least... Thanks, -Clint On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Ken Chase <rsync-list-m829 at sizone.org> wrote: > This has been a consideration. But it pains me that a tiny change/addition > to the rsync option set would save much time and space for other legit use > cases. > > We know rsync very well, we dont know ZFS very well (licensing kept the > tech out of ou...

...grity of this communication has been maintained or that the communication is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. Please consider the environment before printing this email. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 01:51:21 -0400 From: Ken Chase <rsync-list-m829 at sizone.org> To: rsync at lists.samba.org Subject: rsync --link-dest won't link even if existing file is out of date Feature request: allow --link-dest dir to be linked to even if file exists in target. This statement from the man page is adhered to too strongly IMHO: "This option...

Feature request: allow --link-dest dir to be linked to even if file exists in target. This statement from the man page is adhered to too strongly IMHO: "This option works best when copying into an empty destination hierarchy, as rsync treats existing files as definitive (so it never looks in the link-dest dirs when a destination file already exists)". I was suprised by this behaviour

Wow, it took me a few seconds to figure out what you were trying to do. What's wrong with rm? Also I think trying to leverage the side of disqualifying all source files just to get the delete effect (very clever but somewhat obtuse!) risks creating a temporary file of some kind in the target at the start of the operation, and if you cant even mkdir then that exceeds disk quota immediately

This post http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/153262/get-rsync-to-dereference-symlinked-dirs-presented-on-cmdline-like-find-h explains most of what i want, but basically, looking for a find -H option to rsync. Reason is so that I can hit a source (or target!) dir in rsync by making a nice dir of symlink maps. For eg openVZ names their containers with ID#s which isnt very condusive to

What is taking time, scanning inodes on the destination, or recopying the entire backup because of either source read speed, target write speed or a slow interconnect between them? Do you keep a full new backup every day, or are you just overwriting the target directory? /kc On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 10:06:57AM +0200, Dirk van Deun said: >> If your goal is to reduce storage, and scanning

Ok I found a bug about this: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6542 and it says fixed by upgrade. I found a way to upgrade. Using: rsync version 3.1.1 protocol version 31 on receiving side that issues the rsync command, and rsync version 3.1.1 protocol version 31 on the remote sending side. Im still getting the same thing: rsync: hlink.c:126: match_gnums: Assertion `gnum >=

. is the 'current directory' notation in unix. .. is the parent directory. /kc On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 01:57:09PM -0700, Parke via rsync said: >Hello, > >I ran the following commands: > >rsync /tmp/foo remote: >rsync remote:/tmp/foo . > >On the remote computer, the following commands were executed: > >rsync --server -e.LsfxC . .

How do you handle snapshotting? or do you leave that to the block/fs virtualization layer? /kc On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 01:35:27PM +1200, Henri Shustak said: >> Our backup procudures have provision for looking back at previous directories, but there is not much to be gained with recycled directories. Without recycling, and after a failure, the latest available backup may not have much

not a bug, buy colour me confused: /tmp/foo$ mkdir a /tmp/foo$ touch a/foo /tmp/foo$ touch a/.baz /tmp/foo$ cd .. /tmp$ rsync -avP --exclude=a/* foo bar sending incremental file list created directory bar foo/ foo/a/ sent 71 bytes received 20 bytes 182.00 bytes/sec total size is 0 speedup is 0.00 /tmp$ ls -la bar total 20 drwxr-xr-x 3 user user 4096 Jan 24 14:17 . drwxrwxrwt 70 root

problem is he's trying to rsync into the target dir and have the side effect of delete. so an empty dir would necessarily need to be in the target of course and thus created there, triggering the quota block. he tried to avoid this by using device files then 'blocking all device files' but i think rsync figures out first there's nothing to do, so it just stops and doesnt do the

If your goal is to reduce storage, and scanning inodes doesnt matter, use --link-dest for targets. However, that'll keep a backup for every time that you run it, by link-desting yesterday's copy. Y end up with a backup tree dir per day, with files hardlinked against all other backup dirs. My (and many others) here's solution is to mv $ancientbackup $today; rsync --del

rsyncing a tree of perhaps 30M files, getting this: rsync: hlink.c:126: match_gnums: Assertion `gnum >= hlink_flist->ndx_start' failed. then a bit more output and

Sounds to me like maintaining the metadata cache is important - and tuning the filesystem to do so would be more beneficial than caching writes, especially with a backup target where a write already written will likely never be read again (and isnt a big deal if it is since so few files are changed compared to the total # of inodes to scan). Your report of the minutes for the re-sync shows the