similar to: patch: timeout problem solved

Currently rsync has a bit of a problem with very large files. Dynamic block sizes were introduced to try handle that automatically if the user didn't specify a block size. Unfortunately that isn't enough and the block size would need to grow faster than the file. Besides, overly large block sizes mean large amounts of data need to be copied even for small changes. The maths indicate

Mark II of the patch set. The first patch (dynsumlen2.patch) increments the protocol version to support per-file dynamic block checksum sizes. It is a prerequisite for varsumlen2.patch. varsumlen2.patch implements per-file dynamic block and checksum sizes. The current block size calculation only applies to files between 7MB and 160MB setting the block size to 1/10,0000 of the file length for a

On 5 Jan 2005, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote: > On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 18:24 +0100, Robert Lemmen wrote: > > hi rusty, > > > > i read on some webpage about rsync and debian that you wrote a patch to > > rsync that let's it uses heuristics when deciding which local file to > > use. could you tell me whether this is planned to be included in

Wayne, It's taken a little while for me to get more familiar with the code, but I think I've reached a good breakpoint in improving batch-mode. Let me highlight some of the changes in the attached patch: * --write-batch and --read-batch arguments are no longer passed from client to server. This fixes the current problem that causes the server threads to die when the client

Greetings, I'd like to propose a new option to rsync, which causes it to read device files as if they were regular files. This includes pipes, character devices and block devices (I'm not sure about sockets). The main motivation is cases where you need to synchronize a large amount of data that is not available as regular files, as in the following scenarios: * Keep a copy of a block

Wayne, Please consider the attached patch. This applies to the current CVS, and is independant of patches/local-batch.diff. As a matter of fact, I'm sure it would conflict heavily with local-batch.diff. This version of batch mode has a couple distinguishing features: Write-batch records (almost) the entire sender side of the conversation into one file. ("Almost" because it has

Maybe security related mails should be sent elsewhere? I didn't notice any so here it goes: sender.c:receive_sums() s->count = read_int(f); .. s->sums = (struct sum_buf *)malloc(sizeof(s->sums[0])*s->count); if (!s->sums) out_of_memory("receive_sums"); for (i=0; i < (int) s->count;i++) { s->sums[i].sum1 = read_int(f);

The attached patch adds some whitespace to the recv_files() function declaration, and renames variable 'f' to 'f_out' in generate_files(). -------------- next part -------------- Index: generator.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/rsync/generator.c,v retrieving revision 1.93 diff -b -c -r1.93 generator.c *** generator.c 30 Jun

Author of the message didn't include rsync@lists.samba.org in the reply, and I think this message is in topic. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: rsync windows -> unix still hanging :( Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:24:47 -0800 From: Jim Kleckner <jek_subs@kleckner.net> To: Mike Rubel <mrubel@galcit.caltech.edu> CC: cygwin@cygwin.com References:

Here's a patch that makes rsync try to find an existing file in a group of hard-linked files so that it doesn't create the first one in the group from scratch if a later file could be used instead. Details: I decided to avoid having the code do an extra scan down the list when we encounter the lead file in the list. This is because it would be bad to have to do the same scan in the

Hi, In http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2002-09/msg01155.html, I noted that the often-observed hangs of rsync under Cygwin were assuaged by a call to msleep(). After upgrading my Cygwin environment to rsync 2.5.6, I'm seeing these hangs again, not surprisingly given a CVS entry for main.c notes that this kludge was not harmless: Revision 1.162 / (download) - annotate - [select for

Hi All, Here's an rsync patch which adds an --offline flag, letting you transfer changed blocks via removable media, while still comparing checksums via the net. I expect this could be very popular for the growing number of people who want to do disk-based offsite backups, which is what I needed it for. It took me longer than I hoped, but still only several hours to work this out -- it

Here is a diff which should allow applying batch updates remotely ( as apposed to copying the batch files to the remote server and running rsync there ). Eg rsync --write-batch=test src dst1::dst rsync --read-batch=test dst2::dst Oli Dewdney diff -E -B -c -r rsync-2.5.6/flist.c rsync-2.5.6-remotebatch/flist.c *** rsync-2.5.6/flist.c Sat Jan 18 18:00:23 2003 ---

Yes, it's time once again to return to the subject of moving files. With the recent changes to the communications code between the receiver and the generator, there is now a non-clogging channel that we can use to signal the sender when a file has been successfully transferred, which allows us delete the original for all transferred files. I have in the past waffled on whether this feature

Here's the latest version of the batch mode cleanup patch. Index: batch.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/rsync/batch.c,v retrieving revision 1.12 diff -u -r1.12 batch.c --- batch.c 24 Jan 2002 08:09:46 -0000 1.12 +++ batch.c 6 Feb 2002 19:47:57 -0000 @@ -8,55 +8,38 @@ #include "rsync.h" #include <time.h> -char

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5020 Summary: hang using RSYNC_CONNECT_PROG Product: rsync Version: 3.0.0 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: Matt_Domsch@dell.com QAContact:

As I reported a while back rsync doesn't handle metadata (permissions and ownership) in dryrun mode. I offered to make a patch and that offer still stands. I didn't have the time for it until now and want to pick it up again. I had some ugly hack back then but I want to redo it in a clean way. I would like some input on my thoughts. IMHO, it would be ideally if the check for dry_run

I've been studying the read and write buffering in rsync and it turns out most I/O is done just a couple of bytes at a time. This means there are lots of system calls, and also most network traffic comprises lots of small packets. The behavior is most extreme when sending/receiving file deltas of identical files. The main case where I/O is buffered is writes from the server (when io

I just picked up rsync 2.5.6 and installed it. I haven't actually _used_ it for anything yet; this is entirely about a handful of minor issues I noticed while building it. You may care or you may not; for simplicity of language (to avoid many repeated "in case you care" and such), the text below is written assuming you care about them all. On a (32-bit) SPARC system, I noticed:

> Just curious: what about the rsync+ patch? Thanks for the reminder. I've just committed Jos's rsync+ patch onto the "branch_mbp_rsyncplus_merge" branch. If it works OK and nobody screams I will move it across onto the main tree tomorrow or Wednesday. I see the patch doesn't add documentation about the new options to the man page, so we should fix that in the future.