On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 18:33 -0600, Harry Putnam wrote:
> Wayne Davison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 03:09:48AM -0600, Harry Putnam wrote:
> >> - /.kde*
> >
> > That doesn't exclude anything, since you already included things that
> > match that. You should be using "-
Wayne Davison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 03:09:48AM -0600, Harry Putnam wrote:
>> - /.kde*
>
> That doesn't exclude anything, since you already included things that
> match that. You should be using "- *" to exclude everything else other
> than what was explicitly inc
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 19:37 -0500, Peter wrote:
> > Rsync performs no encryption of its own, but if you transfer over SSH,
> > SSH encrypts the entire rsync data stream.
>
> And that is done with '-e "ssh -l ssh-user"' or '--rsh=ssh' or is it done
> unless I use --rsh=?
Encryption happens wheneve
--- Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 19:12 -0500, Peter wrote:
> > $ rsync -av -e "ssh -l ssh-user" [EMAIL PROTECTED]::module /dest
> >
> > Ok, but what happened to the --rsh stuff?
>
> -e is another name for --rsh.
>
> > Are transfers always encrypted or is en
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 19:12 -0500, Peter wrote:
> $ rsync -av -e "ssh -l ssh-user" [EMAIL PROTECTED]::module /dest
>
> Ok, but what happened to the --rsh stuff?
-e is another name for --rsh.
> Are transfers always encrypted or is encryption activated with a specific
> incantation?
Rsync perform
Hi folks. Running rsync on Slackware. I'm going over the man pages yet
some aspects remain murky. Hopefully someone can set me straight.
1. The --rsh option,
The man page explains that you can invoke a single-transfer daemon if you
want some features that a daemon provides:
$ rsync -av --rsh=
Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 10:17:51AM +0100, Blickwinkel wrote:
> > Thanks, I was trying your hint with the su command, but somehow
> > "--server" seems to get passed to su and fails:
>
> That is a GNU thing with them reordering options unless POSIXLY_CORRECT
> is set to "1" i
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 08:01:19PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ... on the other hand you are saying that this happens anyway with the
> automatic checksum verification, regardless which options you use?!
Good grief. The *after* transfer checksum verification of transferred
files always happ
Believe it or not, NDMPcopy was slower. At best it
was the same speed. NDMPcopy takes 4 hours to lay
down the files and directories, then it starts copying
data. (ontap ver 6.4.5).
--- Ryan Kather <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Because of the inefficiencies of using NFS to NFS
> rsync, would yo
Hello Wayne,
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 07:13:27PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> is this documented in detail somewhere? ;)
>
> The "how rsync works" document mentions the checksum verification at the
> end of a transfer:
>
> http://rsync.samba.org/how-rsync-works.html
>
> It was not reall
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 07:13:27PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> is this documented in detail somewhere? ;)
The "how rsync works" document mentions the checksum verification at the
end of a transfer:
http://rsync.samba.org/how-rsync-works.html
It was not really mentioned in the rsync man
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 06:47:34PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Does the -t option use a checksum at all?
>
> No, but rsync does -- as I just said, rsync automatically does a
> whole-file checksum of every transferred file to ensure that it was
> transferred correctly. This always happens.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 06:47:34PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Does the -t option use a checksum at all?
No, but rsync does -- as I just said, rsync automatically does a
whole-file checksum of every transferred file to ensure that it was
transferred correctly. This always happens.
> The --
Hi,
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 04:55:40PM +0100, Mario Ohnewald wrote:
>> i would like to know when the checksum (-c option) gets executed excatly
>> and where. [...]
>> The way i want/need it would be:
>>1. make checksum on (full) source file
>>2. transfer file
>>3. check checksum o
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 08:30:29PM +0300, Igor Yu. Zhbanov wrote:
> This patch is for version 2.6.6 (if you interesting in it):
Thanks! I'm considering using this, or at the very least putting the
diff into the patches dir.
..wayne..
--
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/
Wayne Davison said the following on 15/02/2006 16:52:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 02:51:24PM +, Rich Stanton wrote:
rsync -r -t --delete -i --modify-window=10 --exclude=/**/.*
[...]
.f..t shared/calculator.xls
This was fixed in 2.6.6. Before th
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 04:55:40PM +0100, Mario Ohnewald wrote:
> i would like to know when the checksum (-c option) gets executed excatly
> and where. [...]
> The way i want/need it would be:
>1. make checksum on (full) source file
>2. transfer file
>3. check checksum on (full) dest
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 02:51:24PM +, Rich Stanton wrote:
> rsync -r -t --delete -i --modify-window=10 --exclude=/**/.*
[...]
> .f..t shared/calculator.xls
This was fixed in 2.6.6. Before that, the 't' indicator was being
output for any diference in time values rather than honoring your
-
Hello List,
i would like to know when the checksum (-c option) gets executed excatly
and where.
I aleady had a look in the docs and in the source code, but wasn´t too
lucky.
The way i want/need it would be:
1. make checksum on (full) source file
2. transfer file
3. check checksum on
On Wed 15 Feb 2006, Rich Stanton wrote:
> I'm running rsync 2.6.4 on debian stable ppc, backing up a couple of
> home directories to a Netware filestore mounted through ncpfs. My
> command looks like this:
>
> rsync -r -t --delete -i --modify-window=10 --exclude=/**/.*
> --exclude=/xxx/ /home/xx
I'm running rsync 2.6.4 on debian stable ppc, backing up a couple of
home directories to a Netware filestore mounted through ncpfs. My
command looks like this:
rsync -r -t --delete -i --modify-window=10 --exclude=/**/.*
--exclude=/xxx/ /home/ /home/ /mnt/
The backup works fine, excep
How about a shell script? Scan the directories and start "x" instances
of rsync at a time, when one finished, have the script fire up another,
until the list of directories is complete..?
Gian
The design is outside of my control. It's not a
regular replication it's a migration from one
Because of the inefficiencies of using NFS to NFS rsync, would you not be
better using a native utility from filer to file, such as ndmp copy?
>>> Jerry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 02/13/06 09:31PM >>>
I'm trying to sync up 54 million files. I can break
it down into different applications, but I still
G'day Jerry,
> -Original Message-
> From: Jerry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, 15 February 2006 2:55 PM
> To: Frank Hamersley; rsync@lists.samba.org
> Subject: RE: sync 54 million files, tuning rsync?
>
> The design is outside of my control. It's not a
> regular replication
I think rsync over two nfs mounted volumes is an ongoing 'problem',
partly (mainly?) because people forget that these are 'local' files and
lots of the neato rsync speedups don't do anything or just get ignored.
If there is no way for you to run a separate rsync on local and remote
machines, your f
25 matches
Mail list logo
