when dealing with 1GB+ files, rsync is
4-5 _times_ slower than rcp.
What OS?
I'm downloading cygwin (slow) to see if I can compile a Windows rsync that
doesn't show this nasty behaviour.
I just did a test on about 3.5GB total, Linux - Linux. I got 11 minutes vs.
9 minutes on , which for bulk
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 05:55, va_public wrote:
I got used to rsync's -v --progress option so much that I used it
instead of rcp even to simply copy files across the network. I dont
like software that doesnt talk to me! :-) I like the percentage bar
that --progress gives!
To my surprise,
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 05:55, va_public wrote:
RSYNC DOES NOT WORK WITH 1GB+ FILES... unless you have a
sufficiently
large block size. See the following;
http://www.mail-archive.com/rsync@l.../msg05219.html
OK. I read the
RSYNC DOES NOT WORK WITH 1GB+ FILES... unless you have a sufficiently
large block size.
According to the archives, block size doesn't fix anything. At any rate, I'm
highly disappointed that rsync is relying on statistical good fortune.
We've used rsync extensively in our company for moving
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 09:53:05PM -, va_public [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 05:55, va_public wrote:
RSYNC DOES NOT WORK WITH 1GB+ FILES... unless you have a
sufficiently
large block size. See the
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 08:55, James Knowles wrote:
RSYNC DOES NOT WORK WITH 1GB+ FILES... unless you have a sufficiently
large block size.
According to the archives, block size doesn't fix anything. At any rate, I'm
highly disappointed that rsync is relying on statistical good fortune.
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 08:53, va_public wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 05:55, va_public wrote:
RSYNC DOES NOT WORK WITH 1GB+ FILES... unless you have a
sufficiently
large block size. See the following;
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 11:36, Craig Barratt wrote:
RSYNC DOES NOT WORK WITH 1GB+ FILES... unless you have a sufficiently
large block size. See the following;
http://www.mail-archive.com/rsync@lists.samba.org/msg05219.html
Let's be careful here. Rsync *does* work on 1GB+ files. What
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 01:03:16PM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 11:36, Craig Barratt wrote:
RSYNC DOES NOT WORK WITH 1GB+ FILES... unless you have a sufficiently
large block size. See the following;
http://www.mail-archive.com/rsync@lists.samba.org/msg05219.html
I wasn't aware that it had this. Was it there at the time of the
original discussion (Oct 2002)? The people involved in the discussion
then didn't seem to know this.
I wasn't aware of it in Oct 2002 during that discussion. I saw it in
the code a month or two after that. I haven't checked the
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 13:20, jw schultz wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 01:03:16PM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 11:36, Craig Barratt wrote:
RSYNC DOES NOT WORK WITH 1GB+ FILES... unless you have a sufficiently
large block size. See the following;
[...]
However,
On 20 Feb 2003, Donovan Baarda abo-at-minkirri.apana.org.au |Rsync List| wrote:
RSYNC DOES NOT WORK WITH 1GB+ FILES... unless you have a sufficiently
large block size. See the following;
http://www.mail-archive.com/rsync@lists.samba.org/msg05219.html
This probably needs to be documented
12 matches
Mail list logo
