On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:28:21 -0700 jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The referenced mail message describes the benchmark as: > | The directory backed up or restored had 10000 1-byte files > > That isn't a very good benchmark. 10,000 files is not that > many and being 1 byte means that all that is measured is the > filesystem meta-data, node-creation time and overhead.
The purpose of that benchmark was to measure those factors. > That the test used the --delete option indicates that some > percentage of the files would have not been touched by rsync. My > guess is that the unmodified files account for cp -a being slower; > rsync processed fewer files than cp. The fact that the benchmark > description does not indicate the actual rate of change (a > determining factor for rsync and, i assume, rdiff-backup) makes it > decidedly dubious. The description was slightly unclear; the numbers in the first group indicate copying into an empty directory, so both processed the same number of files. > I believe the speed complaint had to do with files that have > significant amounts of data in them. My remark was off-topic then. -- Ben Escoto
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
