[Bug 5478] rsync: writefd_unbuffered failed to write 4092 bytes [sender]: Broken pipe (32)

2011-10-07 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5478 --- Comment #20 from Tim Taiwanese Liim 2011-10-07 21:57:54 UTC --- I agree with Wayne and Eric that Eric's issue is outside of rsync, somewhere in the transport. Eric, Have you tried to check the TCP buffers of the ssh process on both ends? For

Re: Permissions option

2011-10-07 Thread James Moe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/07/2011 12:20 PM, Kevin Korb wrote: > I believe order matters. It needs to be after the --archive. > > Actually, you really shouldn't be using --archive anyways because > FAT only supports a couple of the things in --archive. You should > use

Re: Permissions option

2011-10-07 Thread Kevin Korb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I believe order matters. It needs to be after the --archive. Actually, you really shouldn't be using --archive anyways because FAT only supports a couple of the things in --archive. You should use - --recursive and --times instead of --archive and a

Permissions option

2011-10-07 Thread James Moe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello, rsync v3.0.7 I am backing up data to a USB memory drive that is formatted FAT32, which does not comprehend linux permissions. I added the "--no-perms" option to the option set. rsync still attempts to change the permissions. OPTS = "--no-

[Bug 8513] New: files from local filesystem on source written to different filesystem on dest despite --one-file-system

2011-10-07 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8513 Summary: files from local filesystem on source written to different filesystem on dest despite --one-file-system Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All

[Bug 8512] rsync -a slower than cp -a

2011-10-07 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8512 --- Comment #3 from Sandon 2011-10-07 17:45:53 UTC --- I am seeing performance problems as well but CPU bottleneck. My issue is even cp is CPU bottlenecked and dd with direct i/O gives me the best performance. Nobody mentioned -W before but it didn

[Bug 8512] rsync -a slower than cp -a

2011-10-07 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8512 --- Comment #2 from Ben Bucksch 2011-10-07 17:30:58 UTC --- As you said, all these options are irrelevant when rsync is in the middle of copying a single big file. This copy loop is inefficient, that's what my test case shows. And it's very much re

[Bug 8512] rsync -a slower than cp -a

2011-10-07 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8512 --- Comment #1 from Brian K. White 2011-10-07 17:17:49 UTC --- If it were'nt just one file, having -v and -r and -D and not having --inplace on rsync would be unfair. Only for a single file like this you can get away with it. Also it doesn't affect

[Bug 8512] New: rsync -a slower than cp -a

2011-10-07 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8512 Summary: rsync -a slower than cp -a Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core

Re: Estimating backup usage with dir-merge filter

2011-10-07 Thread Paul Dugas
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Henri Shustak wrote: >>> It sounds like you missed the point of Kevin's message (in the other fork >>> of this thread).  The point wasn't to use >>> `du`, it was that you can run your stats against the backed-up files, not >>> the source.  Then you're only running