pub crawler dijo [Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 04:51:52AM -0400]: > We could/should rsync these files just for sanity/backup/duplication > reasons. Never can have too many live copies. > > Am a tad reluctant to mirror/sync these files since we store all files > in one big directory - logos in one, photos in another. The > directories have thousands of files and growing. Currently, perhaps > 6k files per directory maximum- entirely too many in one directory- > but for now. > > I suppose I am looking for an endorsement from someone about using > rsync in such a manner with a big pile of files in several > directories. Anything out there that monitors file system live time > and reflects new changes/files near live time versus timed event > basis?
rsync is specially well suited for mirroring large numbers of files - I use it extensively for its traditional use (full server backups), and it is quite agile. But, yes, it takes a fair bit of processing just to detect what has to be moved over - rsync does not store the status on where it is standing right now. Possibly your best way out would be to use a version control system - possibly SVN (as AFAIK it works better on Windows) or Git (as it is _way_ faster and has some features that can be useful for your use case, i.e. the ability to forget very old history by doing shallow clones instead of full clones). Wit any SVN, you can add post-commit hooks to actually do the synchronization work. Greetings, -- Gunnar Wolf - [email protected] - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244 PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23 Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF _______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
