Eli wrote: > Andrew wrote: >> Is there some philosophical or practical reason why rsync >> cannot use some persistent external database to map remote >> inodes to local inodes? > > No idea if this is done or not, but couldn't inodes be recycled if a file > is > deleted and the inode marked free? Then the error of renaming might be > done > - unless you mixed it with date/file size info too or something.
You're right, but that's already done in skip_file(). The lookup table would "suggest", but the usual checks would still have to be applied to "confirm". > Also, do > *all* file system types use inodes in the same way? I've no idea. I cherish my UNIX-centric bias <laugh>. > And what about > filesystems remotely mapped in which maybe you don't have access to real > inode info? I've no idea. Perhaps there is no solution for some file systems. Would that mean that such a feature could not be included? Perhaps, like ACL support, it would be included as an "add on"? - Andrew -- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
