On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:31:08PM +0100, Ren? Rebe wrote: > Also I found the current code does decide from the receiving-side file > what blocksize to use.
The idea here is that the only checksum data that get transmitted and stored in the hash table are those for the blocks in the file on the receiving side. The sender's file is read from beginning to end looking for checksum matches in this receiver-file hash table. We at least avoid the problem of over-filling the limited-slot hash table with too many checksum blocks. However, it is also true that using a small block size for a large sender-side file does cause the sender to search for more block matches than a larger block size, so this does affect performance. So, perhaps the size of the sending file should be factored into the calculation in order to set a minimum acceptable block size. This would be easy, because the generator already knows the size of both files at the time that it performs this calculation (or else it wouldn't have been able to figure out if the file was up-to-date or not). ..wayne.. -- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
