https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3358
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3358
--- Comment #6 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-02 10:21 MST ---
This is weird, there is no network activity during this building file list
phase. However, as soon as it is finished, rsync saturates my network.
I thought rsync worked, if
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3358
--- Comment #7 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-02 11:02 MST ---
(In reply to comment #6)
This is weird, there is no network activity during this building file list
phase. However, as soon as it is finished, rsync saturates my network.
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3358
--- Comment #8 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-02 11:42 MST ---
What is weird about that?
You wrote in a previous comment when I asked why rsync is considering a file
for 30 minutes if it is not checksumming it:
Because it is
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3358
--- Comment #2 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-12-29 13:47 MST ---
Intereseting, didn't knwo that rsync worked that way - I thought the default
behaviour was to only replace the parts of the file that had changed. Anyway,
this motivates a
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3358
--- Comment #3 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-12-29 13:48 MST ---
Btw, I am just trying your suggestions. First I will try the inplace switch and
secondly I will test syncing with twice the amount of space required for the
file available.
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3358
--- Comment #4 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-12-29 13:54 MST ---
Sorry for spamming, but I just realised what you meant when you wrote:
You can use the --checksum option to avoid this unneeded update at the expense
of a lot of extra disk
