search for: retransferring

Hi, i have to tranfer large files each 5-100 GB (mo-fri) over dsl line. unfortunately dsl lines are often not very stable and i got a broken pipe error. (dsl lines are getting a new ip if they are broken or at least after a reconnect every 24 hours) i had a script which detect the rsync error and restart the transmission. this means that if a file has transfered e.g. 80 % i start again from

I have the samba with AC DC running... that was fun...not. Debian Wheezy with backport, # samba --version Version 4.1.7-Debian and I am using BTRFS for the file systems. My issue. I have about 400gig of files that were shared with a samba the old way, security = user I was hoping I could just change the ownership recursively to be something standard, like root:sambashares and put it in the

I use rsync regularly for backups of large trees, sometimes over low bandwidth links, and I would like to suggest a potentially major speedup under some circumstances, where files or folders are moved or renamed. The principle is simple : often people rename a file, or move it from one folder to another. Current behaviour (please correct me if I am wrong) is for wget to see this as a

Hi, I?m migrating an old Zarafa-installation to a dovecot using mdbox and sis on Debian Jessie. To copy over the emails, I use doveadm backup on the new box - or more precisely: vmail# doveadm -v -o imapc_user=$user -o imapc_password=$pass -o imapc_host=$host -o imapc_features=rfc822.size -o imapc_port=993 -o mailbox_list_index=no -o imapc_ssl_verify=no backup -R -x "Public folders*"

Hello, I use rsync (among many other things) as an incremental backup tool. Every night I save /{home,etc,var} from several servers. On one of them we keep 52 weeks of system logs, so each time syslog is rotated all old syslog.x.gz (where x is between 1 and 213) change names. This impacts our backup transfers because the incremental snapshot now has to include all syslog.x.gz files even though

hi, while all files is owned by nsd user and nsd run as nsd the nsd.db is still owned by root user (because the compiler run as root and create this file as root, ok i know just it'd be better if this file is owned by nsd too). another strange thing is that on the slave nsd i've got such messages: ----------------------------------------- zonec: reading zone "lfarkas.org".

Mark, The patch seems to cause problems if there are any transfer interruptions (as mentioned in the comments in the patch). However, even on a retransfer, the earlier partially transferred file is not fixed, although the client appears to think the transfer has completed successfully. This appears to be a serious bug. Note: Both client and server have the inplace patch, and on Linux platforms

Hi, My situation is that I would like to use rsync to copy very large files within my network/systems. Specifically, these files are in the order of 10-100GB. Needless to say, I would like to be able to restart a transfer if it only partially succeeded, but NOT repeat the work already done. Currently, I am initiating the transfer with this command: rsync --partial --progress theFile

Hi, Anybody knows how rsync transfer one single file if there is difference between the two files, will rsync re-transfer the whole file or only transfer the difference? In my experiment, i found rsync would retranster the whole file again if there's a difference. What I did were: I manually created a huge.txt (file size 100813288 ), run rsync command to transfer this file from server 1 to

Hi Folks, I was wondering if I could ask this question here. Initially when I was thinking up how to do this I was expecting block encryption to stay consistent from one 'encryption run' to the next, but I found out later that most schemes randomize the result by injecting a random block or seed at the beginning and basing all other encrypted data on that. In order to prevent

Rsync version 2.6.7pre1 is now available for release testing. Please give it a try and send email to the regular mailing list with any questions, comments, bug reports, etc. You can read all about the latest improvements and bug-fixes in the NEWS file: http://rsync.samba.org/ftp/rsync/preview/rsync-2.6.7pre1-NEWS For the tar file itself, you'll find it here (with its signature):

Hi All, I am wondering when we do live migration, how much memory is transferred? I guess it must be one of the three below, but not sure which one: 1. The amount of memory allocated to VM 2. The memory currently used by VM (actual Mem usage in guest) 3. The memory used by the qemu process (RSS). Best Regards, Hui

Why are you encrypting the files and not the filesystem and the channel? On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Xen <list at xenhideout.nl> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I was wondering if I could ask this question here. > > Initially when I was thinking up how to do this I was expecting block > encryption to stay consistent from one 'encryption run' to the next, but I >

With regard to this NEWS item from 2.6.1pre-1: * The --hard-link option now uses the first existing file in the group of linked files as the basis for the transfer. This prevents the sub-optimal transfer of a file's data when a new hardlink is added on the sending side and it sorts alphabetically earlier in the list than the files that are already present on the receiving side. I

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2783 ------- Additional Comments From wayned@samba.org 2005-06-10 12:40 ------- Rsync uses a large amount of CPU on the sending side due to the fact that the rsync algorithm is trading CPU and disk I/O to reduce network I/O (and using an encryption algorithm on top of that only makes the CPU that much higher, so using a daemon connection is less CPU

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3175 wayned@samba.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #1518 is|0 |1 obsolete| | Attachment #1519 is|0 |1 obsolete|

Hi all, wouldn't it be much more comfortable if rsync would delete every sent file just after completing the single file transfer? Thus one could transfer files that could be processed by the receiver and there get moved or deleted avter processing. With large directories and e.g. wireless connections rsync connection could break up and could be restarted without the possibility to

i have a sync that i do daily on my home directory home directory -> external drive A i recently got a bigger external drive (B) and move my backup file tree from drive A to drive B. i gave the new drive the same name as the old drive, so all of the file paths will look the same to the backup script. My daily sync usually takes 3 minutes. After moving the backup tree, the first sync took 20

On 7/11/06, Ahmed Ibn Fahdlan <d13warrior@msn.com> wrote: > Scenario :: > > on SRC I had A and B dir on the same share. A dir has 100 files while B > is empty. > then rsync to Destination... 100% sucess. > > Then all files on A dir has been MOVE to B dir. > What is the rsync option if i dont want to sync the files on source B dir > but rather check > if it