similar to: [Bug 2294] Detect renamed files and handle by renaming instead of delete/re-send

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #39 from andy <andy at digitalsignalperson.com> --- > This feature request is so old it has lost relavence because btrfs/zfs/etc are more optimal backup solutions than rsync. Funny I am doing exactly this, but I came to rsync looking for a backup for when ZFS fails. Many consider zfs/btrfs/snapshots as "not a backup".

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #41 from Mihnea-Costin Grigore <mihnea at zulu.ro> --- The discussion about file systems like ZFS/BTRFS/etc. and their various snapshot mechanisms is off-topic relative to this feature request, since they are very different technologies used for different purposes. rsync is used commonly to synchronise at the *file level* between

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #24 from Karl O. Pinc <kop at meme.com> --- On Sun, 06 Mar 2016 22:20:16 +0000 samba-bugs at samba.org wrote: > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 > > --- Comment #23 from dajoker at gmail.com --- > Looking for this capability prior to entering it as an enhancement > request myself, I found everything

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #25 from Andrey Gursky <andrey.gursky at e-mail.ua> --- On Sun, 06 Mar 2016 22:20:16 +0000 samba-bugs at samba.org wrote: > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 > > --- Comment #23 from dajoker at gmail.com --- > Looking for this capability prior to entering it as an enhancement request > myself, I found

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #20 from kevin.layer at gmail.com 2014-03-02 03:08:37 UTC --- I've been playing with the --detect-renamed patch https://git.samba.org/?p=rsync-patches.git;a=blob;f=detect-renamed.diff;h=c3e6e846eab437e56e25e2c334e292996ee84345;hb=master I can't get seem it to work. Does it rely on other patches? Anyway, in a simple test, using

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 ------- Additional Comments From blackb1rd@seat-ibiza.nl 2005-02-11 01:58 ------- I totally agree this one. With this enhancement there would be no longer unnecessary traffic when some user has moved / copy'ed a large directory (which is really annoying). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #26 from Ben RUBSON <ben.rubson at gmail.com> --- ### What's the diff between --fuzzy and --detect-renamed ? If I understand correctly, --fuzzy looks only in destination folder, for either a file that has an identical size and modified-time, or a similarly-named file, and uses it as a basis file. Whereas --detect-renamed looks

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 Summary: Detect renamed files and handle by renaming instead of delete/re-send Product: rsync Version: 2.6.3 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #23 from dajoker at gmail.com --- Looking for this capability prior to entering it as an enhancement request myself, I found everything here and basically have the same use case. My version is that I am creating a regular backup of logs from many servers' services onto a single box, and doing so with rsync. Some of those services

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 boris@folgmann.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |boris@folgmann.de ------- Comment #6 from boris@folgmann.de 2007-07-11 09:50 CST ------- I'm using rsync 2.6.9 to archive rotated

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 ------- Comment #8 from bill+samba@bfccomputing.com 2008-11-30 17:24 CST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > Thanks. This will be especially useful for log directories where logrotate is > incrementing the filename number at each rotation period (httpd.10.gz -> > httpd.11.gz). Since I mentioned this specific use case, I should

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #27 from Wolfgang Hamann <wolfgang at maas-noten.de> --- Hi, I recently ran into the problem that a large file set got renamed and then re-sent. I tried to fix after the fact, so I went the obvious way of comparing sizes and modtimes on the destination and calculate checksums for potential matches. I would have preferred to use a

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #22 from elatllat at gmail.com --- Wow 10 years. Maybe one reason this has not been implemented is there are other options. For example I have been using a shell script as a wrapper to reduce the iteration of this bug, here is how it works: 1) Create 2 lists of files; destination and source with the files sizes and path 2) For each file

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 ------- Comment #12 from phr-samba at nightsong.com 2011-01-28 20:38 CST ------- Hi, I was about to enter a similar suggestion to this. My very frequent use case is moving files from one directory to another. In that situation the file name does not change--just the directory path leading to it. These are often quite large files (0.2 to

Hi Kevin, Just did: same result. -- Best regards / Met vriendelijke groet, Aron Rotteveel 2015-03-27 14:32 GMT+01:00 Kevin Korb <kmk at sanitarium.net>: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Try it without any --delete options. > > On 03/27/2015 09:31 AM, Aron Rotteveel wrote: > > I am now running with --delete --numeric-ids --relative but the

Anyone have any other ideas I could try to debug this issue? :) -- Best regards / Met vriendelijke groet, Aron Rotteveel 2015-03-27 16:02 GMT+01:00 Aron Rotteveel <rotteveel.aron at gmail.com>: > Hi Kevin, > > Just did: same result. > > -- > Best regards / Met vriendelijke groet, > > Aron Rotteveel > > 2015-03-27 14:32 GMT+01:00 Kevin Korb <kmk at

I am now running with --delete --numeric-ids --relative but the problem still persists. -- Best regards / Met vriendelijke groet, Aron Rotteveel 2015-03-27 14:22 GMT+01:00 Kevin Korb <kmk at sanitarium.net>: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Try also removing --delete-excluded. Without those two options there > should be no reason for rsync to require

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Try it without any --delete options. On 03/27/2015 09:31 AM, Aron Rotteveel wrote: > I am now running with --delete --numeric-ids --relative but the > problem still persists. > > -- Best regards / Met vriendelijke groet, > > Aron Rotteveel > > 2015-03-27 14:22 GMT+01:00 Kevin Korb <kmk at sanitarium.net >

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Try also removing --delete-excluded. Without those two options there should be no reason for rsync to require gigs of RAM. Well, unless the other system has rsync 2.x. On 03/27/2015 07:29 AM, Aron Rotteveel wrote: > Yes, I removed "--no-inc-recursive", without success. > > -- Best regards / Met vriendelijke groet, > >

Yes, I removed "--no-inc-recursive", without success. -- Best regards / Met vriendelijke groet, Aron Rotteveel 2015-03-27 12:24 GMT+01:00 Kevin Korb <kmk at sanitarium.net>: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Have you tried removing --no-inc-recursive yet? > > On 03/27/2015 07:19 AM, Aron Rotteveel wrote: > > Hi Roland, > > >