similar to: [Bug 3099] New: Please parallelize filesystem scan

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3099 --- Comment #7 from Rainer <rainer at voigt-home.net> --- Hi, I'm experiencing the very same problem: I'm trying to sync a set of VMWare disk files (about 2.5TB) with not too many changes, and direct copying is still faster than the checksumming by a quite large margin because of the sequential checksumming on source and target just

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3099 wayned@samba.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |enhancement Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX

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

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3099 --- Comment #6 from Arie Skliarouk <skliarie at gmail.com> 2013-02-10 06:45:30 UTC --- Any hope for the bug to be resolved? It is really inconvenient to have production database to be down for double amount of time than what is really necessary. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3099 --- Comment #8 from Chip Schweiss <chip at innovates.com> --- I would argue that optionally all directory scanning should be made parallel. Modern file systems perform best when request queues are kept full. The current mode of rsync scanning directories does nothing to take advantage of this. I currently use scripts to split a couple

Is kvm I/O realy disadventage? I use samba file server as kvm guest (LVM storage pool) in some setups and disn't notice any problems. Sequential read/write speed isn't noticeably different from non-virtualized samba host. Did I miss something and should expect sudden trouble? In a letter dated Tuesday, December 27, 2016 2:12:59 MSK by Andrei Petrov via samba wrote: > The most dramatic

The most dramatic disadventage of kvm guest is block device I/O, so I wouldn't recommend to virtualize file server if it is not necessary. In my case on host ntpd configured as source for virtual dc, and bind9 configured as type=slave for zones hosted on dc, (make shure that srv records in _msdcs.mysambadomain.local are resolving when virtual dc is down) and smbd fileserver with

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > 3. How to parallelize post-IPO stage > ==================================== > > From 5k' high, the concept is very simple, just to > step 1).divide the merged IR into small pieces, > step 2).and compile each of this pieces independendly. > step 3) the objects of each piece

I try to fit subsequentially different nonlinear models to data. Up to now I tried a first model and if I could not fit this one proceeded to another one. Now I would like to handle this automatically. But much to my chagrin I did not find a way for dealing with the error messages from nls(), e.g. getting them as "control information" or at least just returning from nls() without a

Hello, does anybody know what's the maximum file size (terabytes?) when using rsync with options --checksum and / or --inplace? What file sizes have been tested in reality? Are there any experiences using rsync (with --checksum and / or --inplace) for big files with several / dozens or terabytes? Thanks a lot, Heinz-Josef Claes

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 7/17/13 12:35 PM, Diego Novillo wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 3. How to parallelize post-IPO stage >>> ==================================== >>> >>> From 5k'

I'm considering using rsync in our data center but I'm worried about whether it will scale to the numbers and sizes we deal with. We would be moving up to a terabyte in a typical sync, consisting of about a million files. Our data mover machines are RedHat Linux Advanced Server 2.1 and all the sources and destinations are NFS mounts. The data is stored on big NFS file servers. The

Am 11.07.24 um 12:47 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: > Hi Stefan, I do not use use btrfs, so I cannot fully answer your > question, but a quick internet search using 'samba btrfs quota' turned > up this Samba bug: > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10541 > > Perhaps that will help. thank you. Hmm. I learned about vfs_btrfs now and set up a test share

Dear Sir/Ma'am: It is significantly beneficial to your library and its patrons to have a book titled "Complete Conduct Principles for the 21st Century" by Dr. John Newton. Please suggest to your local library(ies) that the book be purchased. This is a great contribution you can make to your neighborhood! "I find it heartening that you are crusading on behalf of this

Dear Sir/Ma'am: It is significantly beneficial to your library and its patrons to have a book titled "Complete Conduct Principles for the 21st Century" by Dr. John Newton. Please suggest to your local library(ies) that the book be purchased. This is a great contribution you can make to your neighborhood! "I find it heartening that you are crusading on behalf of this

With some chagrin after spending a couple of hours trying to debug a script, I realized I had typed in something like ans<-optimx(start, myfn, mygr, lower<-lo, upper=up) that is, the "<-" rather than "=". The outcome on my machine was a non-obvious error several layers deep in the call stack. For info, optim() seems to stop much more quickly. The error is

I have a bunch of road warriors who I've set up with Xlite clients. Unfortunately the sound quality has been intermittent at best. Sometimes it's great other times completely unusable. When it's bad one usually hears harsh static when the other party speaks or their voice gets "clipped" to static if they speak too loudly. Many of these users have migrated to Skype ? much

On 7/17/13 12:35 PM, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > >> 3. How to parallelize post-IPO stage >> ==================================== >> >> From 5k' high, the concept is very simple, just to >> step 1).divide the merged IR into small pieces, >> step 2).and compile

Hello Chris, Thursday, January 8, 2004, 5:28:47 PM, you wrote: CL> Though I am mostly ignorant about leading edge distributed (i.e., loosely CL> coupled parallel) programming stuff, I _think_ that network latencies are CL> such that you really need the "big picture" of what a program is doing to CL> know how to profitably distribute and adapt the program to the environment

>>>>> Gabriel Becker >>>>> on Thu, 2 Mar 2023 14:37:18 -0800 writes: > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 2:02?PM Antoine Fabri > <antoine.fabri at gmail.com> wrote: >> Thanks and good point about unspecified behavior. The way >> it behaves now (when it doesn't ignore) is more >> consistent with data.frame() though so I