similar to: cut-off time for rsync ?

> If your goal is to reduce storage, and scanning inodes doesnt matter, > use --link-dest for targets. However, that'll keep a backup for every > time that you run it, by link-desting yesterday's copy. The goal was not to reduce storage, it was to reduce work. A full rsync takes more than the whole night, and the destination server is almost unusable for anything else when it

> What is taking time, scanning inodes on the destination, or recopying the entire > backup because of either source read speed, target write speed or a slow interconnect > between them? It takes hours to traverse all these directories with loads of small files on the backup server. That is the limiting factor. Not even copying: just checking the timestamp and size of the old copies.

If your goal is to reduce storage, and scanning inodes doesnt matter, use --link-dest for targets. However, that'll keep a backup for every time that you run it, by link-desting yesterday's copy. Y end up with a backup tree dir per day, with files hardlinked against all other backup dirs. My (and many others) here's solution is to mv $ancientbackup $today; rsync --del

What is taking time, scanning inodes on the destination, or recopying the entire backup because of either source read speed, target write speed or a slow interconnect between them? Do you keep a full new backup every day, or are you just overwriting the target directory? /kc On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 10:06:57AM +0200, Dirk van Deun said: >> If your goal is to reduce storage, and scanning

You could use find to build a filter to use with rsync, then update the filter every few days if it takes too long to create. I have used a script to build a filter on the source server to exclude anything over 5 days old, invoked when the sync starts, but it only parses around 2000 files per run. Mark. On 2/07/2015 2:34 a.m., Ken Chase wrote: > What is taking time, scanning inodes on

At 10:32 30.06.2015, Dirk van Deun wrote: >Hi, > >I used to rsync a /home with thousands of home directories every >night, although only a hundred or so would be used on a typical day, >and many of them have not been used for ages. This became too large a >burden on the poor old destination server, so I switched to a script >that uses "find -ctime -7" on the source

symbols(iris[,1],iris[,2],rectangles=as.matrix(iris[,3:4]),inches=0.3, ylim=c(1,5)) Error in plot.default(NA, NA, type = "n", ylim = ylim, xlim = xlim, xlab = xlab, : formal argument "ylim" matched by multiple actual arguments Since plot is called inside symbols, with specified xlim and ylim, any specification through ,... hurts this call. I am pretty sure that you

Hllo, I have a Debian Wheezy machine with a standard samba configured as domain controller. (security = user) On the Windows clients a programm shall be installed that needs full access to all files on a network drive I have set the Unix permissions to 777 for all files and subdirectories of the according directory. The share entry is: [myshare] path = /home/shareddirectory admin users =

Hi list I'm attempting to list windows shared printers in Unix. That's really all that I need and I can't install Samba on the machine I need to list the shared printers from. I started analyzing the smbclient code hoping to extract the necessary info but as you all know it's a daunting task. Certainly for a C novice. Which is why I want to ask if there is anyone out there who

Ah, yes. My mistake. I should have been more specific about that of course. First of all thank you L.P.H. van Belle for your quick reply. The thing is, I can't actually install the smbclient on the system I need to list the printers on. It would be too big for what it needs to do. All I need is a small app that lists printers on a remote windows system (usually windows 2000 but it can

I need to be even more clear it seems. I can only do the Unix (AIX) side. I have no resource kit available and a quick look on the net doesn't seem to render any downloadable share.vbs scripts. Besides (if well documented and well written) giving me info on the flow of code on how to list shared printers on remote windows hosts a Windows script won't do me much good. Preferrebly

Is O3-vectorize redundant now that the loop vectorizer is enabled by default? On 2013-01-28, at 12:25 PM, David Blaikie wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Redmond, Paul <paul.redmond at intel.com> wrote: >> Is there a reason why existing buildbots are not generating LNT results? > > Those running LNT should be/are: > >

Is there a reason why existing buildbots are not generating LNT results? On 2013-01-28, at 11:37 AM, David Blaikie wrote: They're just build bots running LNT - check the build bot configuration code in the zorg llvm project repository. You'll probably need to do some work to get a machine quiet enough to have reliable/useful performance results, though On Jan 28, 2013 8:33 AM,

The -vectorize build bots test the BB-vectorizer. Thanks, Nadav On Jan 28, 2013, at 9:39 AM, "Redmond, Paul" <paul.redmond at intel.com> wrote: > Is O3-vectorize redundant now that the loop vectorizer is enabled by default? > > > On 2013-01-28, at 12:25 PM, David Blaikie wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Redmond, Paul <paul.redmond at

Hi Nadav, From: Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com<mailto:nrotem at apple.com>> Date: Monday, 12 August, 2013 1:59 PM To: Paul Redmond <paul.redmond at intel.com<mailto:paul.redmond at intel.com>> Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu<mailto:llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] vector type legalization This is a bug in the

On 2013-03-01, at 11:35 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Paul Redmond" <paul.redmond at intel.com> >> To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> >> Cc: "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> >> Sent: Friday, March 1, 2013 10:06:51 AM >> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] parallel loop

On Aug 12, 2013, at 1:47 PM, Redmond, Paul <paul.redmond at intel.com> wrote: > Thanks for the tip. I modified WidenVecRes_Binary match WidenVecRes_{Unary/Ternary} and it does the promotion and generates much better code. Why is WidenVecRes_Binary so much more complicated than the Unary/Binary functions? None of the operations in the cases for WidenVecRes_Binary seem any more special

Hi Andrew Morton, The patch "[patch 05/22] ocfs2: lighten up allocate transaction" in mm tree is not the newest one, please drop it from mm tree. This patch V3 is newest, please replace it. Thanks. The issue scenario is as following: When fallocating a very large disk space for a small file, __ocfs2_extend_allocation attempts to get a very large transaction. For some journal

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > To: "Paul Redmond" <paul.redmond at intel.com> > Cc: "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, March 1, 2013 11:13:06 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] parallel loop metadata simplification > > ----- Original Message ----- > >

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Redmond" <paul.redmond at intel.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, March 1, 2013 10:49:24 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] parallel loop metadata simplification > > > On 2013-03-01, at 11:35 AM, Hal