The problem is some files don't change in size. So I was hoping that the checksums could be cached. Perhaps I'm mistaken but I thought the checksum determined what actual blocks were transferred. I suppose it could be cached at either storage location.
_____________________________ Stephen Zemlicka Integrated Computer Technologies PH. 608-558-5926 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt McCutchen Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 5:03 PM To: Stephen Zemlicka Cc: rsync@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: Mapped Drive On 9/28/07, Stephen Zemlicka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there a way to have rsync cache the checksums for something like this and > would that help? I'm not sure exactly what you mean. You said you were using the -c (--checksum) option, which makes rsync decide whether to update each destination file by reading the file in full and comparing its MD4/MD5 checksum with that of the source file. Do you mean you want rsync to cache the checksums of the destination files? On which machine would the cache be? Anyway, if the issue is that you don't want rsync spending the bandwidth to read the destination files for the --checksum check, just remove -c and rsync will use the default size-and-mtime quick check. Matt -- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
