Dear Folks,
Our Company VESTEK have been using "rsync" for the
past 4 months. As of today, it was pointed out that any
file larger then 2,147,483,647kb (to be specific) could not
be rsynced. We found too that this message in our com-
mon output file showed up:
send_files failed to open .../dat
the attached patch adds the "synchronize these files and then chown/chgrp
them to a specified user/group, no matter who owns the originals" feature.
the relevant usage lines are now:
-o, --owner preserve owner (root only)
-o, --owner=OWNER specify owner (root onl
I had the wrong path in conf file.
Thanks. I found right after I sent the mail.
On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 01:07:32PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] thus spat:
| Three things:
|Does the system support chroot?
|Is the rsyncd running as root?
|Is the path correctly specified in the rsyncd.conf?
Yes, built. Compiled with specific options. Do you have any
questions about building on AIX? (again, I mention 4.1.5 and Apple
hardware because it is older and different, but it should be easier
on your newer, standard boxes)
Your I/O wait was on the box being read from or written to? How
How about using something like the Cryptographic File System (CFS),
where the files are stored encrypted locally, and the encryption is
confined to blocks. This is done to make the encrypted files
random-addressable in the CFS implementation, but a consequence it
seems to me is that at least some
Why not rsync to a system where you are the root user?
On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 08:27:35PM +0100, Jose' Sebrosa wrote:
>
> The problem
> ---
>
> I want to copy a file from machine A (master) to machine B (backup) but I would
> like to stop root user on machine B to easily look at the f
The problem
---
I want to copy a file from machine A (master) to machine B (backup) but I would
like to stop root user on machine B to easily look at the file contents. So I
encrypt the file to send at machine A and send just the encrypted version to
machine B (which has no means to dec
On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 11:47:11AM -0700, Jason Helfman wrote:
> Why would I be getting this on a box? I have the same permissions on
> many other directories. Using verbose mode shows nothing more then the
> error in the Subject line.
That error is coming from an rsync daemon server. Are you ad
Three things:
Does the system support chroot?
Is the rsyncd running as root?
Is the path correctly specified in the rsyncd.conf?
I can't think of anything else I've run into or read of, to cause that problem.
If it's not number three, try running it as root. If that fails, try adding
use
Why would I be getting this on a box? I have the same permissions on
many other directories. Using verbose mode shows nothing more then the
error in the Subject line.
Any help is appreciated.
--
Jason G Helfman
Network Administrato
On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, Andre Pang wrote:
> ssh is your problem
I believe Hans said that he only uses ssh to startup the samba-using
process going, and then transfers all files "locally" with rsync. So,
the problem is that samba is doing all the data transfer over the
network instead of rsync.
So
--- Andre Pang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ssh is your problem;
Yes, encryption can take considerable CPU amount.
Have you tried to use the '-c' option of ssh?
Blowfish was about 4 times faster than 3des when
I last checked it.
--
Siebren van der Zee.
__
On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 06:53:01PM +0800, Hans E. Kristiansen wrote:
> Each client uses ssh to start a server script in their home
> directories, which in turn mounts the client drive to perform
> the actual backup.
>
> On other days, I use rsync -avW, ( which is marginally better
> than -av ),
Quick question(s)
I am trying to improve the speed for an rsync backup. At the moment, we have
workstations running windows 98 and I have a Linux 2.2.19 server who
accesses the client disks using samba to take the backup. rsync is running
in local mode, e.g. accesses directories only. Each client
I have had the same problem, but I was using the 2.4.8 kernel ( in a
production environment ). I reverted back to 2.2.19, with no changes.
I believe that the problem in my case was the 3COM drivers, 3c90x. I have
now changed the driver to the 3C59x, which seems to work fine.
Although the sympto
15 matches
Mail list logo
