On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 14:12 -0500, Boris Toloknov wrote: > Ming Zhang wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 20:19 -0500, Boris Toloknov wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > It seems that rsync transfers files whose names was changed or which > > > were moved to another directory since the previous synchronization. I > > > think that ability not to transfer (large) files which are present on > > > another computer would be very helpful. Right before rsync is going to > > > transfer some large file it could check if there some other files with > > > the same size ( and maybe the same mtime ) on the destination > > > computer. In case if the destination computer has such files then it > > > could be asked to find the file with given MD5. If it's found then > > > there is no need to transfer that file. Local copy/rename/move can be > > > performed instead. > > > > > > > let us say you have N files in one directory and you rename the > > directory name. so for N files, u need to check destination side all M > > files and see if it is the renamed one. so you do NxM comparison and > > this is not scalable at all... > > > I think that a hash could be used instead of that. The destination > computer ( at least ) must has a list of all the files in the > destination directory. The key = size + mtime and value = pointer to > the file entry in the list. Actually for that operation it would be > better to have that list and hash on the sending computer.
rsync 3.0 introduce incremental scan to avoid the OOM issue, so hash need to be optional as well... also i think this hash can be used to detect hard link at same time. for normal use, it should be ok. > > Boris -- Ming Zhang @#$%^ purging memory... (*!% http://blackmagic02881.wordpress.com/ http://www.linkedin.com/in/blackmagic02881 -------------------------------------------- -- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
