>> > However, I have read that using rsync --delete instead of rsync -- >> > delete-after is faster and uses less memory, and so is more efficient. >> I'd be surprised if it makes a significant difference. > If you use --delete-after (and some other options) then rsync has to > check every file before it can do any work,
Oh, right, I was thinking of `--delete-delay`.
[ Tho, as you mention, the performance impact of `--delete-after` is
also negligible in many cases. ]
Stefan
