Re: UDT4 and rsync? support to socket.c?

2010-03-24 Thread Jan Wagner
Jamie Lokier kirjoitti: Jan Wagner wrote: Hi, has anyone of the devels considered adding UDT4 fast reliable udp transport to socket.c, as a user-selectable alternative to using default slow TCP? It could give a 4 to 10-fold throughput improvement to rsync speed over wide area networks.

Re: --delete question.

2010-03-24 Thread Matt McCutchen
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 12:10 +0530, Satish Shukla wrote: > Please advise on rsync usage. --delete doesn’t work without > recursion(--recursion). The recursion is causing huge overheads for > me. My directory trees are huge. Any suggestions through which I can > cut overheads. It used to work well

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7289] --link-dest seen as unknown option

2010-03-24 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7289 m...@mattmccutchen.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7289] --link-dest seen as unknown option

2010-03-24 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7289 --- Comment #2 from p...@lowell.edu 2010-03-24 11:41 CST --- never mind it should be link-dest (not list-dest) ::blushes:: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7289] --link-dest seen as unknown option

2010-03-24 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7289 --- Comment #1 from m...@mattmccutchen.net 2010-03-24 11:40 CST --- (In reply to comment #0) > # rsync -az --list-dest=../dir1 dir_s/ dir_d > rsync: --list-dest=../dir1: unknown option You misspelled --link-dest. -- Configure bugmail

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7289] New: --link-dest seen as unknown option

2010-03-24 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7289 Summary: --link-dest seen as unknown option Product: rsync Version: 3.0.7 Platform: x64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: blocker Priority: P3 Component

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7057] Buffer overflow when sending a file with long name

2010-03-24 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7057 jzel...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #5215 is|0 |1 obsolete|

Re: Incremental recursion not working

2010-03-24 Thread Paul Slootman
On Wed 24 Mar 2010, Gerald Holl wrote: > Maybe it's because of too many files? The file list consists of > approx. 450.000 items. Incremental recursion works per directory. If all those 450.000 files are in one directory, then incremental recursion won't help. The number of items isn't the probl

--delete question.

2010-03-24 Thread Satish Shukla
Please advise on rsync usage. --delete doesn’t work without recursion(--recursion). The recursion is causing huge overheads for me. My directory trees are huge. Any suggestions through which I can cut overheads. It used to work well in rsync-v2.5.5 /opt/rsync-v2.5.5/bin/rsync --delete --chec

Re: Incremental recursion not working

2010-03-24 Thread Gerald Holl
On 24.03.2010 01:37, Matt McCutchen wrote: On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 14:40 +0100, Gerald Holl wrote: I'm using rsync 3.0.3 over ssh to sync data between two hosts. I can't get the incremental recursion working: rsync -vLogtprz --progress --delete --delete-during --partial -e "ssh -p 1234" --numeric-