similar to: crtimes discrepancy on PPC

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13522 Bug ID: 13522 Summary: Patch fileflags.diff and crtimes.diff Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core Assignee: wayned at samba.org Reporter:

I've been getting spurious unnecessary copying of files on OSX when using the crtimes patch and the --crtimes -H options (version 3.0.4). I can reliably demonstrate it (on OSX 10.5) by doing this several times (as root): rsync -v -N -axHAX --delete-during --fileflags --force-change /usr/ bin/ /tmp/foo/ I think I've tracked it down to the hard-link processing code in

Wayne, I tried changing "unsigned long" to "uint32" as you suggested, but that doesn't work. The compiler adds padding to the struct to make the fields 64-bit aligned and it has the same problem. ?To convince the compiler that the timespec really should come immediately after the length, the struct can be packed with the pragma pack directive. ?I tested the following, and

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7685 Summary: rsync should not set the creation data on the root folder of an HFS+ volume Product: rsync Version: 3.0.7 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Mac OS X Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10643 Summary: cmp_time() returns incorrect result due to integer overflow Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org

When rsync'ing to an Ext2 file system (via SSH), then I frequently get error messages such as "failed to set times ...". AFAICS, these error messages are caused by rsync trying to change the time (and permissions, ownership) of symbolic links, which according to my knowledge is not possible on Ext2. Is there any way to get rid of these supposedly superfluous error messages? rsync

I wrote on Fri, 02 Jan 2015 16:02:27 +0100: > --- a/generator.c 2014-06-14 01:05:08.000000000 +0200 > +++ b/generator.c 2015-01-02 15:50:30.000000000 +0100 > @@ -588,7 +588,14 @@ > if (ignore_times) > return 0; > - return cmp_time(st->st_mtime, file->modtime) == 0; > + return cmp_time(st->st_mtime, file->modtime) ==

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6276 Summary: crtimes.patch does not preserve creation dates on Mac x86_64 only Product: rsync Version: 3.0.6 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Mac OS X Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org

Hi All, I promise I won't bug you anymore about this but I did find that the compiled universal binary on rsync3.0.pre10 does preserve creation dates across platforms with the old osx-create-time.diff patch but not with the crtimes patch. If anyone has a clue about this I would be happy to fix it. Thanks again Rob D PS so close!

On systems using nanoseconds differences should be taken into consideration. --- a/generator.c 2014-06-14 01:05:08.000000000 +0200 +++ b/generator.c 2014-12-25 11:19:54.000000000 +0100 @@ -588,7 +588,13 @@ if (ignore_times) return 0; - return cmp_time(st->st_mtime, file->modtime) == 0; + return cmp_time(st->st_mtime, file->modtime) == 0 +#ifdef ST_MTIME_NSEC + ?

Hi all I ran a workload that reads & writes within 10 files each file is 256M, ie, (10 * 256M = 2.5GB total Dataset Size). I have set the ARC max size to 1 GB on etc/system file In the worse case, let us assume that the whole dataset is hot, meaning my workingset size= 2.5GB My SSD flash size = 8GB and being used for L2ARC No slog is used in the pool My File system record size = 8K ,

Hi. Here's a patch for copying the atimes of files when -t/--times is given. I bumped the protocol to 29 since it sends more data over the wire. It obviously does not send the atime if it's sending data to an older rsync version. It passes all the tests (including the added atime.test) for me on a: Linux Debian/3.0 gcc 2.95.4 (debian), glibc 2.2.5 system. Any questions/feedback? I

I posted a patch a few days ago that adds copying of atime. At that time, it was just enabled with -t/--times. After some time, we have figured out that that choice might not have been the best. Here's a new version of the patch (relative to CVS) that adds -A/--copy-atime instead. It also includes a test case. Any feedback on this patch and/or the previous one that I posted?

Hi, first of all, sorry for taking so long. Unfortunately, some other tasks kept coming up. Anyway, attached is the version of the flags patch, that is based on the one I'm using with 2.6.9. It is against the rsync-3.0.0pre9 release. I've included the option name change from the repository, so the option is now called --fileflags. Improved from the previously distributed version is the

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11521 Bug ID: 11521 Summary: rsync does not use high-resolution timestamps to determine file differences Product: rsync Version: 3.1.2 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core

From: Anand <anand.jain@oracle.com> This patch adds creation-time to the snapshot list display, which would help user to better manage the snapshots when number of snapshots grow substantially. This patch is developed and on top of the send/receive btrfs and btrfs-progs repo at git://github.com/ablock84/linux-btrfs.git (send-v2) git://github.com/ablock84/btrfs-progs.git (send-v2)

Dear All, Along with the files that suddenly disappear, we have a bit of a problem with these that do not. Namely, in my test runs I can see a small but stable set of files, that rsync is repeatedly trying to transfer, and then repeatedly fails to updates their times ; and then the story repeats itself. The situation is illustrated by the log snippet below, where I have changed file names to

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9103 Summary: ext4 creation timestamp Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: x64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: enda_k2 at yahoo.com QAContact:

My simple functions were to compare the result with the gfortran compiler sum() function. I thought that the Fortran sum could not be less precise than R. I was wrong. I am impressed. The R sum does in fact match the result if we use the Kahan algorithm. P. I am glad to see that R sum() is more accurate than the gfortran compiler sum. On 16/03/18 11:37 AM, luke-tierney at uiowa.edu wrote:

Hi all, I found a discrepancy between the sum() in R and either a sum done in C or Fortran for vector of just 5 elements. The difference is very small, but this is a very small part of a much larger numerical problem in which first and second derivatives are computed numerically. This is part of a numerical method course I am teaching in which I want to compare speeds of R versus Fortran (We