On Wed, 2009-10-28 at 10:01 +0100, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: > On 28.10.2009 09:05, Satish Shukla wrote: > > We have huge data to sync usually everyday and I wish rsync could guarantee > > performance. > > > > I thought of spliting the directories and run parallel rsyncs on them. It > > may cost me some network, but I can control that from the MAX_RSYNC_PROCESS > > variable. Can some one evaluate pros and cons of this design?. Any help is > > heartily appreciated. > > That only works IF: > - You have SSDs (preferably good ones, both sides) > - Each rsync covers a different physical HDD (both sides) > - You have a massive Array with truck-loads of HDDs and a matching > controller or something along that line (again both sides). > - A combination of the above would also work > > Otherwise parallel rsyncs completly kill any performance you had because > normal HDDs will fall into a seek-storm, when more than 1 rsync works on > them.
Asynchronous I/O may solve that, on OSes that support it. See also this RFE, on which I have just commented: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5124 -- Matt -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
