Now that depends on your filesystem choice doesn't it?
If your filesystem stores directory entries in something other than an unsorted list, yes it should be faster. This is why some applications (Mail and Usenet News are the two that come to mind) have a system to hash all the files into smaller bins/directories.
When I first saw this message, my answer was use rsync with --from- file... but alast I was too busy to craft an answer that said that.
But if your filesystem still keeps you directories in something that is unhashed, then you might as well just let rsync do it's job, you are only saving a stat call at that point, but rsync will walk the directories in directory order (as I recall), so it could be faster if you have a huge directory.
johno On Nov 3, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Rudie, Tony wrote:
Rsync should be fine. And searching for a specific entry in a directory should be way faster than looking at every entry to see if it needs copying. Right?
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ bblisa mailing list [email protected] http://www.bblisa.org/mailman/listinfo/bblisa
