similar to: --append skipping longer files

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13660 Bug ID: 13660 Summary: State clearly in manpage that --append-verify is an edge-case Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core Assignee:

I am using rsync 2.6.9 in daemon mode under Cygwin, and having trouble reconciling its --append behavior with that described in the man page: The man page says that when you use --append, it will update a file by appending, which presumes the existing data on the receiving side matches. But when I run rsync with append mode when the existing file on the receiving side is shorter than on the

I just noticed, too late )-: --append This causes rsync to update a file by appending data onto the end of the file, which presumes that the data that already exists on the receiving side is identical with the start of the file on the sending side. Any files that are the same size or shorter on the

Hi, I frequently rsync larger files from my rented server to my PC. Sometimes I have to stop the rsync process and restart it a while after (e.g. I'm shutting down my PC for the night, ...), sometimes several times per source file. I like the two following features: (1) The unfinished files should stay in a own directory (I call it '.dl'). I'm talking here about the 'temp'

Hi List, I'm currently backing up a number of samba servers onto a remote server using a perl script called rsnapshot which utilises rsync. Over the last few i've started using posix ACL's on my samba server and now I would like to be able to back up these ACLS's. All of my servers are have their filesystems (ext3) mounted with ACL support and i am using the following version

Hello, I've got 2 analogue lines (from SBC) coming into a TDM22B. SBC have put rollover from the first to the second line. The rollover works fine when handsets are connected directly to the lines (ie when Asterisk is not involved), but when the lines are connected to Asterisk, the rollover fails: the caller just hears the line ringing, and the person on the first (busy) line hears call

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5318 Summary: Rsync assertion in check_prior() when using --append Product: rsync Version: 3.0.0 Platform: Other OS/Version: FreeBSD Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy:

Hi: I need periodically rsync a bunch of very big files. These files are append-only so changes are already at the end of the file. Because files are big, I assume it will take some time comparing the first part of files. Is there a way that I can tell rsync to sync only the extra part at the end of file, and do not compare the first part of files? Thanks. Chuang

It was broucht up before indeed: https://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/2012-June/027680.html On 12/30/18 9:50 PM, devzero--- via rsync wrote: >> There have been addons to rsync in the past to do that but rsync really >> isn't the correct tool for the job. > why not correct tool ? > > if rsync can greatly keep two large files in sync between source and destination >

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1529 Summary: 32bit rollover problem rsyncing files greater than 4GB in size Product: rsync Version: 2.6.2 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org

I just copied a file system using xfsdump|xfsrestore At least 1 new directory had been created on the source during the xfer (took 9+hours -- 7TB), so I wanted to verify I hadn't missed anything. Using rsync: > rsync --version rsync version 3.1.0 protocol version 31 Capabilities: 64-bit files, 64-bit inums, 64-bit timestamps, 64-bit long ints, socketpairs, hardlinks,

I have the following situation: file2 on remote host and file1 on localhost. file1 and file2 are mostly the same. Simply running rsync remotehost:file2 file2 will actually transfer the entire file. But I would like to use the factt that I have local file1 that is mostly similar to file2. I.e. how can I make rsync to use file1 as a reference while transferring file2? (cp file1 file2 locally and

I've been using tinc to do some high bandwidth VPNs between nodes in Amazon's EC2 environment (to work around some limitations there for effectively loadbalancing raw TCP connections while preserving the sources addresses, using Linux IPVS in NAT mode). The raw amount of traffic involved is probably making this a bit of a corner case for tinc. In the overall it has held up remarkably

On 25.11.2014 15:02, net.rsync at io7m.com wrote: > 'Lo. > > I've run into a frustrating issue when trying to synchronize a > directory hierarchy over a reliable (but slow) connection to an > unreliable remote. Basically, I have the following: > > http://mvn-repository.io7m.com/com/io7m/ > > This is a set of nested directories containing binaries and

Hi All, In the application that I am building, I've to "incrementally" copy several files of large sizes (around 1 GB) from several machines (some 300 in number) spread across various geographic locations. We've been using scp until now and are exploring rsync for the same. In my application, these files are being written to (still being updated) while rsync will be reading from

Hi, I have written a 'smallish' patch to implement the --inplace option as discussed on this mailing list at various points in the past. It makes a small modification to the sender algorithm so that it won't ask the receiver to relocate blocks from earlier in the file when running with the --inplace option. I would appreciate any testing and feedback people can provide! I

Hello, i use rsync from Windows to rsync on Linux via ssh and get IO Errors and connection unexpectedly closed errors on almost every sync run. Can anybody give me some hints on how to track down the problem? thx, Chris 2008/10/11 09:41:04 [13744] rsync to backup// from UNKNOWN (w.x.y.z) 2008/10/11 09:41:04 [13744] receiving file list 2008/10/11 09:42:48 [13744] IO error encountered -- skipping

Hello, It's been noticed that mailing list monthly rollovers didn't happen because the machine was down when the cronjob to do the rollover would normally have fired. I will trigger them by hand now... upshot is that I'm not bothering to refile the first five days of May in the correct slot. I sincerely hope that no one cares :-) Monty --- >8 ---- List archives:

Hello, It's been noticed that mailing list monthly rollovers didn't happen because the machine was down when the cronjob to do the rollover would normally have fired. I will trigger them by hand now... upshot is that I'm not bothering to refile the first five days of May in the correct slot. I sincerely hope that no one cares :-) Monty --- >8 ---- List archives:

Hello, It's been noticed that mailing list monthly rollovers didn't happen because the machine was down when the cronjob to do the rollover would normally have fired. I will trigger them by hand now... upshot is that I'm not bothering to refile the first five days of May in the correct slot. I sincerely hope that no one cares :-) Monty --- >8 ---- List archives: