search for: max_block_size

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13433 Bug ID: 13433 Summary: out_of_memory in receive_sums on large files Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core Assignee: wayned at samba.org Reporter:

Attached is a patch that makes window strides constant when files are walked with a constant block size. In these cases, it completely avoids all memmoves. In my simple local test of rsyncing 57MB of 10 local files, memmoved bytes went from 18MB to zero. I haven't tested this for a big variety of file cases. I think that this will always reduce the memmoves involved with walking a large

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8512 Summary: rsync -a slower than cp -a Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: linux.news at bucksch.org QAContact:

...negative maximum number): > 2008-08-24 18:11:45 E [protocol.c:342:gf_block_unserialize_transport] server: frame size (168) > max (-2147458000) Speaking in the IRC channel, Anand Babu (aka rooty) had reason to suspect the following segment of code: > [2008-08-24 18:28] <rooty> if (max_block_size && (blk->size > max_block_size)) { > [2008-08-24 18:28] <rooty> gf_log (trans->xl->name, GF_LOG_ERROR, > [2008-08-24 18:28] <rooty> "frame size (%"PRId32") > max (%"PRId32")", > [2008-08-24 18:28] <rooty&gt...

...twork load of just sending checksums. array_size is the memory footprint sums array which could compounded by the sum hash could be a limiting factor on the size file a given machine can reasonably handle. The second table shows the effect of --block-size=16384 and is indicative of what setting a MAX_BLOCK_SIZE would do. file length block_len block_count s2length xmit sums array_size 50 700 1 2 6 36 831K 920 926 2 5556 32K 1439K 1208 1221 2 7326...