similar to: [Fwd: Re: rsync windows -> unix still hanging :(]

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

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

FYI, We've been using the 2.4.7pre1 release for several days now, with nary a hang problem. We haven't seen the EOF bug at all, which was what we upgraded for. This is with transfers of as much as 50GB to set up an initial mirror. The only thing we did was set timeout=0 -- which I guess is unnecessary. The semantics of this flag are a bit unclear. We thought was 'time since

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 16:10:32 -0800 From: Jim Kleckner <jek-cygwin@kleckner.net> To: Mike Rubel <mrubel@galcit.caltech.edu>, cygwin@cygwin.com Mike - Greger Cronquist and I

Hello everyone! I didn't find anything in the archives that seemed similar (same error, different offending lines of code). I'm having an issue with rsync on a couple of my servers. A couple of others run just fine but 2 of them give me the same message (see below) when I try to do backups from one server to these linux boxes. All of the linux boxes are the same and have the save

People of cygwin & rsync, I recently attempted to get cygwin and rsync working to solve a backup/mirroring need in my computer life. Well, as you might guess, I ran into a little but of trouble. Strangely enough, rsync seemed to be regularly hanging when I attempted to do a "get" (sycronize a remote to a local dir). Well, considering I want to automate this, that was not going

I'm working on trying to get rsync 2.5.6pre1 available for people to test more widely. I'm out of time for today, and I'm stuck on a problem that some machines on build.samba.org are showing on the 'chgrp' test. I can reproduce this on my home redhat 7.3 system too. It appears to be a timing problem because when I do strace -F -f on it the problem goes away. Everything seems

Some of the debug messages that rsync outputs (when verbose >= 2) can occur on both sides of the connection. This makes it hard to know which program is saying what. Some debug messages deal with this by outputting a "[PID]" string at the start of the message. Unfortunately, the startup message that tells us which pid is which is only output when verbose >= 3, so there's a

[This is a copy of the contents of Debian bug report #147842.] Package: rsync Version: 2.5.5-0.2 Severity: normal Cause ----- - rsync forks a child which in turn forks a grandchild in main.c:do_recv(). - Diagnostics written by the grandchild need to be read by the child using read_error_fd() to be handled properly (with the end result being that they are seen by the user running rsync). -

Hello, I like to use rsync to transfer over mine and other peoples ever changing mail folder onto a remote server. My Server (FreeBSD 5.4) RSYNC Version is: 2.6.6 Protocol Version 29 My Client (OSX 10.4.2) RSYNC Version is: 2.6.3 Protocol Version 28 I use this command rsync -vvv --progress --stats --recursive --times \ --perms --links \ --delete /test/my?email?folder/*

> 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.

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

I compiled rsync-2.5.5 on HPUX 11.11, using the +DA2.0W and +O3 options. invoking a simple rsync to transfer a file works (I ran a diff on the file, no changes) e.g: sdx1 214: ./rsync --rsh='/usr/bin/ssh -x' --rsync-path=/usr/local/src/rsync-2.5.5/rsync /scratch/chuck/tmp.test sdx2:/scratch/chuck However, adding the -a option yields an unexplained error: (In all of the following cases

rsync-2.6.6 manpage says: --delete [...] This option has no effect unless directory recursion is enabled. True. In fact, I noted that --delete doesn't delete anything if --dirs is used rather than --recursive. Is there any reason for --delete not to delete when used with --dirs? Is there a way to get rsync to actually delete files on the receiving end when using

(Versions: OpenSSH_3.7.1p2, rsync version 2.6.2) I've just encountered a situation where "rsync -v -n" appears to run normally, but reports many fewer file transfers than actually get done when you remove the -n. (This is not one of the usual "-n" corner cases.) It turns out that this only happens when you're doing a remote rsync over ssh AND you redirect stderr into

As those of you who watch CVS will be aware Wayne has been making progress in reducing memory requirements of rsync. Much of what he has done has been the product of discussions between he and myself that started a month ago with John Van Essen. Most recently Wayne has changed how the file_struct and its associated data are allocated, eliminating the string areas. Most of these changes have been

When I was working on the the hard-link change, I noticed that many of the hard-link verbose messages were getting lost. These messages get output very near the end of the transfer, and it turns out that the reason for the loss was that there are two pipes flowing from the generator and the receiver, and it was possible for the "we're all done" message to get received down the redo

Hi, I've wanted to start working with this CVS version cuz the new "incremental-recursion algorithm" is just what I need. But ran into a problem... When I start the rsync, either with the rsync protocol or rsh, i found that it'll start doing the rsync and just halt after a few hundred MBs or even up to a couple GBs. I was never able to finish an rsync. Anyone else had this

To Whom It May Concern: Below is a patch, that I have used to eliminate the unexplained errors in the rsync program. I was able to trace the problem to the order in which the sigchld_handler and wait_process routines were executed. If sigchld_handler executes first it retrieves the status that wait_process needs to indicate proper rsync termination. The code below allows the sigchld_handler to

Hi all, today we had a performance issue transfering a big amount of data where one file was over 50GB. Rsync was tunneled over SSH and we expected the data to be synced within hours. However after over 10 hours the data is still not synced ... The sending box has rsync running with 60-80 % CPU load (2GHz Pentium 4) while the receiver is nearly idle. So far I had no acces to the poblematic