> From: Annette Strupp-Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 14:55:19 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: rdist vs. rsync
>
> I just started to familiarize myself with rsync and have copied a few
> directories from machine A to machine B. Would any of you be kind enough
> and share your reasons with me as to what rsync does better than rdist ?
The two major selling points for me were:
1) rsync can run over ssh. Meaning that all data is encrypted while being xfered.
Rdist can do this too, if you grab the source and rebuild it, and replace your vendor
copy. (And remember to recopy it over when you install a vendor patch for rdist that
copies the new vendor version over your custom version)
2) If you have a 100 MB file where only 1000 bytes have changed, rdist is going to
copy over the entire 100 MB file. rsync will only copy over the 1000 changed bytes,
and rebuild the file on the other end with the changes. Sure there is a bit of
overhead involved in this, but the time/bandwidth savings _more_ than make up for
that, believe me. :) See the white-paper that comes with the distribution for a full
explanation of the rsync protocol and how it works. It is really pretty neat. :):)
David McCabe Unix System Administrator
Le Groupe Videotron [EMAIL PROTECTED] (514) 380 4433
Of course days are long. 86400 won't fit into a short.
