similar to: [OT] What is the max hardlink number for a single file on XFS

Hi, I detected a silly behaviour of rsync when new hardlinks of already synced files are created: Scenario: There are a local directory and a equal remote directory created by former run of rsync. Create a hardlink from a already existing file (both inside the local directory). If this hardlink has a filename with comes before the original filename when both are sorted in alphabetic order,

I'm running a mirror of several repositories that are fetched using separate rsync runs. Since some of those repositories are hosting related files, I'm using the hardlink utility[1] in order to save disk space. However, I've noticed an issue that may lead to potential file metadata inconsistencies when using hardlink. Consider the following scenario: - two repositories (rep_a and

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8979 Summary: rsync daemon: High load while skipping hardlinks Product: rsync Version: 3.0.5 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: simon.klinkert at

I'm copying a partition that has a bunch of hardlink based snapshots (-aPH). I think there's about 250,000 files in each backup and between 100 and 200 snapshots. Earlier today, I saw the files had completed and it was making all the hardlinks. I thought it would be "not long" but it's been making hardlinks for 12 hours (at least). There's only 36Gb in snapshot, the

Dear all, I am looking for the status on the hardlink patches that were published on this list last february by Miklos Szeredi? I'd really like to have hardlink support in sftp. This would in turn enable hardlinks in sshfs and make incremental rsync backups to remote filesystems possible. can someone tell me if these patches will be incorporated in openssh? The patches can be found under

[please Cc: 666024-forwarded at bugs.debian.org on any replies, thanks] Please see the attached Debian bug report, which includes a helpful bug-reproducing shell script; I've confirmed this still happens with 3.0.9. Paul Slootman On Tue 27 Mar 2012, Ian Jackson wrote: > Package: rsync > Version: 3.0.7-2 > > With rsync --link-dest, if two different source files (not hardlinked

Hello list On my server almost half of files are duplicated, and there are almost 100GB of data which is growing fast. I'm using weekly script to find duplicated files and replace them with hardlinks. Everything is fine as long as users aren't trying to edit and save some documents which have hardlinks. With samba 3.3 it seems that hardlinks aren't unlinked before file is saved.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11161 Bug ID: 11161 Summary: rare crash in hlink.c:536 Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Hardware: x64 OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core Assignee: wayned at samba.org Reporter: sbrabec at

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, jw schultz <jw@pegasys.ws> wrote: > OK, first pass on TODO complete. .... > PERFORMANCE ---------------------------------------------------------- .... > Traverse just one directory at a time > > Traverse just one directory at a time. Tridge says it's possible. > > At the moment rsync reads the whole file list into memory at the >

Hi all, I have some updates on the hard-link discussion. First, let me explain that I installed a test machine with CentOS 7.1 and dovecot/pigeonhole version 2.2.10-4 and the results where identical on what I had on CentOS 6.7 and dovecot 2.0.9-19 The bottom line is that hardlinking works only when no, or at most only one, RCPT have sieve filtering. For example: - if no RCPT has sieve

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, jw schultz <jw@pegasys.ws> wrote: > OK, first pass on TODO complete. .... This hardlink bug report is nearly 21 months old... So I took a look at it using 2.5.7. See below. > BUGS --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Fix hardlink reporting 2002/03/25 > (was: There seems

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4793 Summary: link-dest hardlink does not always work well with -o -g -p Product: rsync Version: 2.6.9 Platform: PPC OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org

Hi all, any ideas? Especially point n.1 (no hardlink when sending the same email to multiple addresses) confuse me a bit. Searching in old messages I even stumbled on some users stating that, using Dovecot LMTP server, they achieved what I want (one messagge, multiple hardlinks), but I am _already_ using LMTP with no avail... Regards. On 27/06/15 18:18, Gionatan Danti wrote: > Hi all,

I have been trying for quite a while now to understand why is the flist.c:f_name() function implemented using static buffers. Anyone care to comment? The immediate problem is that any call to f_name overrides the previous content (well, obvious). This, combined with the fact that several function calls are made with the result of f_name(file) results in problems handling hardlinks - and

Hi Javier, thanks for your reply. I already checked SIS and, while interesting, is not what I want, because: 1) it can be difficult to restore a single message/attachment from a backup 2) only the attachments, and not the entire messages, are deduped. Message-based hardlinks really exists for a reason. The good news is that I found _why_ they are not working: it depends from how dovecot and

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9749 Summary: hardlinkes files are copies instat of make a link Product: rsync Version: 3.0.9 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: dieter.ferdinand at

Hi all, I have some questions about hardlinks, alternate storage and compression. I already scanned the list for related information and I have an idea of how things works, but I would like to have a definite answer. System spec: - CentOS 6.6 x64 - dovecot-2.0.9-8.el6_6.4.x86_64 RPM package/version - sdbox mail store 1) About hardlinks: when sending the same message to two different

Hi, now it's time to come back to this topic. As supposed, the missing hardlinks where no issue of rsync. I am not sure if pairing aufs (http://aufs.sourceforge.net/) and rsync -RH will catch each and every hardlink compared to a single filesystem, but it seems to work very reliable. I tried mhdfs and aufs. Aufs is faster and very stable (I am on wheezy kernel 3.2). So at last I have my

Hi, hardlinking (-H) works perfectly while using a syntax like -avhxSDH <SRC> <DEST> Now I have to mirror multiple SRC directories which contain hardlinks. e. g: src1/a is a hardlink to src2/b -RavhxSDH SRC1 SRC2 DEST does not preserve hardlink a and b in DEST. Is there any chance to do that? Thanks lopiuh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10352 Summary: link-by-hash hardlink-collection maintenance mode Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: jimklimov at