similar to: File rename detection?

Hi, I am thinking about a non-standard usage of rsync (at least not mentioned in the man file) I want to synchronized my collegues home directories(trees) each night AND store rsync's internal updating commands (reversed) to be able to restore the state of a directory the day before. This would require - saving the internal updating commands in a separate directory - reversing these commands

I just took a look at the 2.5.5 codebase to see how easy it would be to write a little driver script that downloads a big directory tree from an rsync daemon the chunky way (get a list of a module's subdirectories and do the transfer by subdirectory). The reason for doing this is obvious when you have large directory trees, as is the case for many of us. Unfortunately the way list_only is

I, too, was disappointed with rsync's performance when no changes were required (23 minutes to verify that a system of about 3200 files was identical). I wrote a little client/server python app which does the verification, and then hands rsync the list of files to update. This reduced the optimal case compare time to under 30 seconds. Here's what it does, and forgive me if these sound

Dear all, I've been trying to track down a problem with timeouts when pulling data from an rsync daemon and I have now run out of any useful ideas. The problem manifests itself when I try to transfer a large directory tree on a slow client machine. What happens then is that the client rsync process successfully receives the list of files from the server, then begins checking the local

Is there a good place to get information about the list of all possible output and error messages rsync generates? Or should I just muck around the source code (which I haven't looked at yet) and find them? I am doing something where I would like to parse rsync's output using Perl into a set of data structures. I already have something that works under normal conditions. Eventually

I was at first, but then removed it. The results were still insufficiently fast. > Were you using the -c option of rsync? It sounds like you > were and it's > extremely slow. I knew somebody who once went to > extraordinary lengths to > avoid the overhead of -c, making a big patch to rsync to > cache checksums, > when all he had to do was not use -c.

Chris, to put things in the right prespective, you should read (if you haven't done so already) the original paper describing the design behind batch mode. The design and implementation of this functionality goes back to a project called the Internet2 Distributed Storage Infrastructure (I2-DSI). As part of that project, the authors created a modified version of rsync (called rsync+)

I've just started using rsync, and it's way cool. I checked the FAQ, the broken mailing list archive search function, and scanned the archives, but didn't see this mentioned. I presume it's a fairly common need: I'm mirroring files automatically and daily from one site to another, and anticipate the day when the size of the files may exceed the size of the destination disk.

There is a new patch named "delete-during.diff" in the CVS "patches" dir. This patch adds the ability for rsync to incrementally delete files in each directory during the normal course of the transfer rather than doing a separate delete scan either before or after the transfer. The patch renames the current --delete option into --delete-before and makes --delete behave in the

I have downloaded and built rsync 2.6.0 on our HP ProLiant DL380-G3 servers (2 Hyperthread processors, 4 GB RAM, 840 GB Hard Disk, etc. etc.) running Red Hat 8 with the latest errata kernel (2.4.20-28smp) and updates from HP for RH8. rsync is run in daemon mode from xinetd. When doing transfers the machine requesting the transfer starts to run out of memory. After every rsync transfer there

At the moment, if you start an rsyncd that's not running as root using default settings it will have some trouble. rsyncd tries to use chroot by default, but this will always fail if it's not started by root. It does emit an error message in this case, but I wonder if some people find this a bit confusing until they discover the setting. I have in the past. It might be better that if

Rsync list: Alberto and I have done a couple more exchanges by private email, and we found that he wasn't turning on my include/exclude optimization in his test because he had an "exclude" directive in rsyncd.conf. He has now removed that and run the test again. His very interesting results are below with my comments. Note that his case is rather pathological because he's got

I am puzzled as to why I can't get the option --link-dest to work properly. When I use this option when both source and destinations are on a local filesystem the hard-linking of the target against the link-dest directory does work, but when the source is a remote directory (via ssh or rsync server) hard links are not created. I suspect it has something to do with setting the correct

Hi Everybody, I'm new to this list, but I have been using rsync for quite some time. First, congratulations to the rsync team for a very fine piece of software! I'm wondering whether rsync could help me to perform the following task: I have 5 million files on one side of the ocean, 100000 of which must be copied to the other side. Both numbers grow with time, and occasionally, some

Wayne, I have been using the rsync snapshot from 1/25 for the last few days and everything seems quite solid so far. I include below a few nit-picks in case you're looking for thing to tidy up. I'm also looking forward to hearing news about the --filter option. I'm thinking it is going to be very useful for backup purposes. What I would want to be able to do is, on a

Dear guru's Hopefully someone can shed some light in my issue. I have created a queue with a ringall strategy and all works fine. I want a caller to be able to exit the queue so they can leave a message. I've added the H option in queue command so callers can press * to exit. So far all well, on the cli there is a message the caller pressed * and the extensions stops ringing. But

I just noticed that there is an extra blank line in the output generated by rsync when the --dry-run (-n) flag is used. This seems to have started with 2.6.0. Is this desired? The reason why I'm asking is because I use scripts that parse the output from rsync and little modifications in verbosity can make or break things easily. Thanks, -- Alberto [ads@localhost bin]$ rsync-2.5.7

Hi, Is there a way in which rsync's -z compression (zlib) utility can be benchmarked? I'm trying to compare the compression ratio between rsync and external compression tools like gzip and bzip2. Are there any advantages to using rsync's internal compression mechanism specified with the -z option compared to solely applying external compression i.e. bzip2 to the files and invoking

Hi, while implementing the rsync protocol in one of our projects I found that the current CVS version still has a MD4 bug. I'm using the FreeBSD libmd implementation and I still had checksum mismatches with protocol version 27 for files whose size was a multiple of 64 - 4 ( - 4 due to checksum_seed). A patch for todays CVS version is attached. Someone should also review the clean_fname()

On Thu, 2004-04-08 at 12:36, Martin Pool wrote: > On 5 Apr 2004, Donovan Baarda <abo@minkirri.apana.org.au> wrote: > > > librsync needs a whole file checksum. Without it, it silently fails for > > case 1), 3), and 4). > > Yes, a whole-file checksum should be used with it. Presumably > something stronger than md4 like SHA-1. md4 is probably good enough for most