Hi, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote on 2011-10-06 19:28:38 -0400 [Re: [BackupPC-users] Bad md5sums due to zero size (uncompressed)?cpool files - WEIRD BUG]: > Holger Parplies wrote at about 17:54:05 +0200 on Thursday, October 6, 2011: > [...] > > Actually, what I would propose [...] would be to > > test for pool files that decompress to zero length. [...] > > Actually this could be made even faster since there seem to be 2 > cases: > 1. Files of length 8 bytes with first byte = 78 [no rsync checksums] > 2. Files of length 57 bytes with first byte = d7 [rsync checksums] > > So, all you need to do is to stat the size and then test the > first-byte
I'm surprised that that isn't faster by orders of magnitude. Running both BackupPC_verifyPool and the modified version which does exactly this in parallel, it's only about 3 times as fast (faster, though, when traversing directories currently in cache). An additionally running 'find' does report some 57-byte files, but they don't seem to decompress to "". Let's see how this continues. I still haven't found a single zero-length file in my pool so far (BackupPC_verifyPool at 3/6/*, above check at 2/0/*). Regards, Holger ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
