similar to: enabling sparse file option with inplace

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11651 Bug ID: 11651 Summary: Can we allow --inplace and --sparse to coexist when --whole-file is in play? Product: rsync Version: 3.1.2 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: core

It seems to me that it should be possible to make --inplace and --sparse compatible. The manpage says -S, --sparse ... Conflicts with --inplace because it's not possible to overwrite data in a sparse fashion. but I think it _is_ possible to do that, provided the receiving side opens the dest file read-write instead of write-only. When writing within the existing

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7194 Summary: Getting --inplace and --sparse to work together Product: rsync Version: 3.0.7 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: jansen at

Hi! As I commonly spell --inplace as --in-place, I'd like to suggest this simple patch: commit 5689f99b702788044a45e13582559832cf986328 Author: Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw at lug-owl.de> Date: Wed Jun 26 22:49:31 2019 +0200 Allow "--in-place" as an alternative option name for "--inplace". diff --git a/options.c b/options.c index e5b0cb68..7ff0c51d 100644 ---

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

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7823 Summary: Documentation enhancement for --inplace option Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: erik at logtenberg.eu

In some filesystems, typically optimized for large I/O throughputs (like IBM GPFS, IBM SAN FS, or distributed filesystems in general) a lot of lseek() operations can strongly impact on performances. In this cases it can be helpful to enlarge the block size used to handle sparse files directly from a command line parameter. For example, using a sparse write size of 32KB, I've been able to

Hi I'm having issues sendig a lot of tar.gz backup files to a ZFS remote filesystem server. This files are compressed with the --rsyncable option. Sending without --inplace option rsync works well and send only the differences, but to create a temporary file and rewrite the file destination, zfs snapshots contain the full size of the backup, not only differences block. I've tried

Hello, rsync is unable to overwrite read-only destination files with the --inplace option. I think this is expected behavior but not convenient for our case. I wrote a small patch that in case of an permission denied error, adds the owner write bit to the permissions and tries to open the destination file again for write again. It's not very elegant but it solved our problem. I attached the

Hi, Filesystem is a XFS. The source file isn't a sparse file, but have big chunks of \0's. $ ls -lh probeta.vdi -rw------- 1 djgera djgera 11G 2008-09-14 02:47 probeta.vdi $ ls -l probeta.vdi -rw------- 1 djgera djgera 10737459712 2008-09-14 02:47 probeta.vdi $ du -h probeta.vdi 11G probeta.vdi when copy with $ rsync -aSv --progress probeta.vdi test-sparse.vdi sending incremental

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7778 Summary: --inplace does extra WRITE operations Product: rsync Version: 3.0.7 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: ildar at altlinux.ru

Wayne, I noticed that rsync will let me apply a non-inplace batch file in inplace mode. This corrupts the destination file if the batch file copies any data forward (from earlier offsets to later ones). Of course, the post-transfer checksum detects the corruption and gives the "ERROR: <file> failed verification" message, but rsync doesn't give the user a clue why the

Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- diff -urN rsync-3.0.2-orig/generator.c rsync-3.0.2/generator.c --- rsync-3.0.2-orig/generator.c 2008-03-28 10:30:11.000000000 -0700 +++ rsync-3.0.2/generator.c 2008-05-07 15:35:08.317364774 -0700 @@ -1508,6 +1508,7 @@ if (preserve_links && S_ISLNK(file->mode)) { #ifdef SUPPORT_LINKS + int iflags =

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5201 Summary: Rsync lets user corrupt dest by applying non-inplace batch in inplace mode Product: rsync Version: 3.0.0 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo:

I worked this out over the weekend. I appreciate that using temporary variables would be simpler but I think this makes for quite readable code: # in RProfile.site inplace <- function (f, arg=1) eval.parent(call("<-",substitute(f)[[arg+1]], f),2) # examples in code inplace(foo[bar,baz] *2) # or inplace(paste(foo[bar,baz], 1:10)) # or inplace(sub("blah",

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4834 Summary: --inplace with --backup --backup-dir does not work Product: rsync Version: 2.6.9 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: joost@seat-ibiza.nl

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --inplace and --append-verify are essentially irrelevant when - --link-dest is in play. With --link-dest in play the target system must write an entirely new file even for a change in permissions or timestamps so any potential benefit by these options are out the window from the start. The only thing they can do is add the possibility of

Mark, The patch seems to cause problems if there are any transfer interruptions (as mentioned in the comments in the patch). However, even on a retransfer, the earlier partially transferred file is not fixed, although the client appears to think the transfer has completed successfully. This appears to be a serious bug. Note: Both client and server have the inplace patch, and on Linux platforms

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11075 Bug ID: 11075 Summary: Shouldn't --inplace fail immediately if it can't make files? Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1646 Summary: --inplace with --backup --backup-dir does not work Product: rsync Version: 2.6.3 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: ard@waikato.ac.nz