Re: ssh failure due to local error

Tue, 18 Aug 2009 12:53:28 +0100, inpost wrote: I repeat: I connect to the remote machine in a separate command terminal to see if the text file was transferred and there was no transfer. I repeated the command with the verbose command: rsync -vt *.txt u...@remote.machine: sent 39 bytes

Re: how to migrate 40T data and 180M files

Hi. Tue, 11 Aug 2009 16:14:33 +0800, gaomingcn wrote: The second question is about memory. How much memory should I install to the linux box? The rsync FAQ (http://rsync.samba.org/FAQ.html#4) says one file will use 100 bytes to store relevant information, so 180M files will use about 18G

Re: rsync compression (-z) and timestamp

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:17:15 +0100, david.delama wrote: Yes, I ran sync on both machines. The same results! :( sync is not enough. You will need to call a script dropcaches.sh that should contain (at least?): - # dropcaches.sh # deletes

Re: rsync compression (-z) and timestamp

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:17:15 +0100, david.delama wrote: I want to test it local, but how can I do it? I don't see the amount of data rsync do compress. -v should do. Example: rsync -z -v gcc-4.3.3.tar a gcc-4.3.3.tar sent 78,192,949 bytes received 31 bytes 3,191,550.20 bytes/sec total size is

Re: file compression on target side

Mon, 19 Jan 2009 20:05:07 -0500, magawake wrote: Using Redhat 4.5; I have been researching this for weeks and all signs and wisemen (such as yourself) point to the Holy Grail -- ZFS! You could try FuseCompress: http://www.miio.net/fusecompress/ The author claims that he improved its speed

Re: find out the meaning of rsync error code

Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:25:05 +0530, jignesh.shah1980 wrote: Could anyone please tell me how to get the meaning of rsync error codes. In rsync return code: 12 error, what 12 indicates? Please use the archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/rsync@lists.samba.org/msg22890.html pgpEalpvdwL2E.pgp

Re: Rsync, what are the max transfer limitations ?

Tue, 18 Nov 2008 20:30:15 +0200, gourgi wrote: rsync -avz rsync://192.168.0.X/disks/4backup /disks/mybackup What happens if you use only -a? pgpC9IcQtOSsl.pgp Description: PGP signature -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change

Re: Rsync 3

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:44:06 +0530, madhavanchari wrote: We want to use the rsync 3 for incremental file transfer of our File system from one box to another, however there are about a million files to be copied, so just wanted to know by any one of your's previous experience with rsync 3, will

Re: rsync many small files

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:25:10 +0200, paul+rsync wrote: You may also want to look at csync2 http://oss.linbit.com/csync2/ for keeping the copies synchronised, it's perhaps better suited than rsync where you have such a large collection of files where there are not that many updates going on (i.e.

Re: rsync many small files

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 06:49:33 -0400, magawake wrote: At our lab we have storage with many small files. For example a directory can contain over 15,000 files and each file averages about 75k. I would like to sync this to another filesystem on a different server but I am not sure if there is a

Re: fixing user, group, and mtime with rsync?

Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:35:40 +, matt wrote: Rsync will preserve symlink mtimes using the lutimes system call if the C library and kernel on the receiving machine both support it. Check that rsync --version shows symtimes, not no symtimes. If the kernel is Linux, it should be 2.6.22 or newer

Re: security bugs (?)

Sat, 29 Sep 2007 10:55:32 +0200, lapo wrote: Lapo Luchini wrote: As a Cygwin rsync package maintainer, the following security fixes have been brought to my attention: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/net-misc/rsync/files/rsync-2.6.9-stats-fix.patch

Re: Recommended way for initial backup before rsync calls

Mon, 3 Sep 2007 20:00:06 -0400, hashproduct+rsync wrote: On 9/3/07, Sven.Hartrumpf wrote: What can you recommend to create the initial backup of a partition before calling rsync (under Linux, 100 GB, 10M files, only normal files and some soft links)? If you're copying an entire

Recommended way for initial backup before rsync calls

Hi rsync'ers. What can you recommend to create the initial backup of a partition before calling rsync (under Linux, 100 GB, 10M files, only normal files and some soft links)? (Using rsync takes too long for this initial copy.) Here are some candidates: 1. star -copy -no-fsync -p -xdot -C $1 .

moderation?

Hi. I get the feeling it's time to turn this list into a moderated one ... Greetings Sven pgp4LjVHOUOLr.pgp Description: PGP signature -- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Re: Has anyone experience with rsync out of memory

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:00:01 +0200, mjacob wrote: I calculated 100 bytes a file which lead me to about 350MB needed for the process. However the process seems to stop already at getting 16MB. Is there any restriction to processes on Unix system that might influence this? Will set ulimit help?

Re: Which rsync version?

Mon, 20 Aug 2007 22:11:12 -0700, wayned wrote: On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 09:20:22PM +0200, Sven.Hartrumpf wrote: #0 0x2b4167a93ee5 in free () from /lib64/libc.so.6 #1 0x00431c9b in pool_free_old (p=0x66fb90, addr=value optimized out) at lib/pool_alloc.c:266 I found and

Re:

the same problem Sven Hartrumpf recently encountered and described in this thread: http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/2007-August/018197.html Now that Sven has provided a useful backtrace for the generator, the ball is in Wayne's court to figure out what is causing the problem

Re: Which rsync version?

Thu, 2 Aug 2007 16:52:53 +0200, paul wrote: On Thu 02 Aug 2007, Sven wrote: I once tried to rsync around 100 GB (10 million files), but version 2.6.6 needed too much RAM and was too slow. I believe 2.6.7 had a number of memory-saving options; each subsequent version will of course have

Re: Which rsync version?

Fri, 3 Aug 2007 10:10:30 +0200, paul wrote: On Fri 03 Aug 2007, Sven wrote: Yes, the cvs version from 20070803T08 started very modestly in terms of RAM, but after some minutes: rsync -a --progress -v /c/ /data/c (source is mounted via nfs) ... ces/002495.ces 105851 100%

Re: Which rsync version?

Fri, 3 Aug 2007 11:48:02 +0200, paul wrote: On Fri 03 Aug 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand, but I have no idea how I can solve this problem. Is rsync starting a second rsync instance? Yes. http://www.delorie.com/gnu/docs/gdb/gdb_26.html may help. Thanks. Now gdb's output

Re: Which rsync version?

Fri, 3 Aug 2007 15:06:51 -0400, hashproduct+rsync wrote: No, that's just another SIGPIPE. There are a total of three rsync processes, forked in the following pattern: sender \_ generator \_ receiver Your first backtrace was for the sender. Setting gdb to always follow the child

Which rsync version?

Hi all. I once tried to rsync around 100 GB (10 million files), but version 2.6.6 needed too much RAM and was too slow. Is one of the snapshots stable enough to try this again? Greetings Sven pgp2q99V2fn3K.pgp Description: PGP signature -- To unsubscribe or change options: