'Lo.
I've run into a frustrating issue when trying to synchronize a
directory hierarchy over a reliable (but slow) connection to an
unreliable remote. Basically, I have the following:
http://mvn-repository.io7m.com/com/io7m/
This is a set of nested directories containing binaries and sources
(until a better answer comes along)
The killed rsync process should leave a temporary file .file-name.random
If you rename the temporary to the real file name, rsync should continue
from about where it left off.
-Original Message-
From: rsync-boun...@lists.samba.org
On 2014-11-25T10:27:13 -0600
Tony Abernethy t...@servasoftware.com wrote:
(until a better answer comes along)
The killed rsync process should leave a temporary file .file-name.random
If you rename the temporary to the real file name, rsync should continue
from about where it left off.
you may have a look here:
http://superuser.com/questions/192766/resume-transfer-of-a-single-file-by-rsync
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16572066/resuming-rsync-partial-p-partial-on-a-interrupted-transfer
if you use inplace or append, for security reason you could even run another
rsync
On 25.11.2014 15:02, net.rs...@io7m.com wrote:
'Lo.
I've run into a frustrating issue when trying to synchronize a
directory hierarchy over a reliable (but slow) connection to an
unreliable remote. Basically, I have the following:
http://mvn-repository.io7m.com/com/io7m/
This is a
On 2014-11-25T20:03:27 +0100
Matthias Schniedermeyer m...@citd.de wrote:
--inplace --partial
The later prevents rsync from discarting partial files, the former makes
rsync reuse already transfered parts and overwriting/appending as
needed.
You only have to be careful if you use
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963
Bug ID: 10963
Summary: rsync to multiple destinations
Product: rsync
Version: 3.0.6
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority:
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963
--- Comment #1 from Dave Yost d...@yost.com ---
Something like this would be useful:
rsync foo s1: --add-destinations s2:dir s3:dir
or
rsync foo s1: --to s1: s2:dir s3:~
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963
--- Comment #2 from Kevin Korb rs...@sanitarium.net ---
These would be separate rsync (and ssh) connections. What use case would
justify bundling them together into a single rsync session? The only benefit
over multiple exections of rsync would
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963
--- Comment #3 from Dave Yost d...@yost.com ---
What I'm after is an argument syntax that supports copying to multiple
destinations.
It's fine by me if rsync executes a multiple-destination command via multiple,
sequential copies.
I am not
How would this be different/better than
rsync options source {dest1 dest2 dest3}
? (The brackets cause bash to repeat the command line for each argument
inside the brackets.)
The only thing I can see is what Kevin pointed out about figuring out
which transfer was involved if an error condition
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963
--- Comment #4 from Kevin Korb rs...@sanitarium.net ---
If you want to run them in parallel then use gnu parallel. It would keep the
specified unmber of jobs running until it runs out of new jobs.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10963
--- Comment #5 from Dave Yost d...@yost.com ---
This is not about running them in parallel.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list.
13 matches
Mail list logo
