On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 05:41:40PM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:16:17PM -0800, Steve Traugott wrote:
> > And then writefd() would need to be toggled from there to write to the
> > correct fd...
>
> On the receiving side, everything that is re
Sounds like you're swapping -- what does free memory look like?
Steve
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:24:51PM -0800, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
> I've set up a 1GB tmpfs filesystem on a system with a single IDE disk and
> 2GB's of memory. I'm storing a large amount of RRD files (~300MB) on the
> tmpfs fil
r flag. And
altering --write-batch again would delay the "stable" release of batch
mode that much longer. These practical considerations mean that I could
argue this either way, so I'm curious what other people think.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 09:19:16AM -0800, Wayne Davison wro
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 11:27:57PM -0600, John Van Essen wrote:
> The Documentation section of the rsync web site has a "How Rsync Works" page:
>
> http://rsync.samba.org/how-rsync-works.html
>
> originally written by the late JW Schultz.
>
> In the pipeline section you'll see that communicati
In offline mode, with only one destination, each batch file is
cumulative -- there is no sequence. Lose one, just regenerate it. Old
batches are useless -- don't keep them laying around and you won't be
tempted to try to apply them again. (It might be perfectly safe to
always say 'rsync --read-b
Another followup to myself... ;-)
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 08:46:20PM -0800, Steve Traugott wrote:
> because the entire protocol goes through write_fd(), I couldn't just
> shut off all traffic there, but instead had to redirect unwanted traffic
> to /dev/null higher up, in send_fi
Just a quick followup...
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 08:46:20PM -0800, Steve Traugott wrote:
> It took me longer than I hoped, but still only several hours to work
> this out -- it turned out to be easy enough. Batch mode did most of
> what I wanted; I just needed to keep --write-batch
Hi All,
Here's an rsync patch which adds an --offline flag, letting you transfer
changed blocks via removable media, while still comparing checksums via
the net. I expect this could be very popular for the growing number of
people who want to do disk-based offsite backups, which is what I needed
