Re: File Locking

2008-08-18 Thread Wayne Davison
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:36:18AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In other words, I can't wait until the first run has completed the > large copy to begin copying additional files. I want to start a > second, third, fourth, etc copy that begins working on any additional > files that may have be

Re: File Locking

2008-08-18 Thread Matt McCutchen
On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 10:36 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have an identical set of directories at two locations. When a file > is added to one location, I'll call it the source side, I want to run > a script that picks up that file and copies it to the other location, > say the destination s

Re: File Locking

2008-08-18 Thread Kyle Lanclos
Another Kyle wrote: > However, I want to schedule the script to run, say every 15 minutes. > That way if a file is put on the source side, the cript will pick it up > and begin copying it. However, if the file is a few hundred MB, it might > take longer than 15 minutes to copy it. > > In other w

File Locking

2008-08-18 Thread lists
our situation. > > >> --Kyle > > Thanks for the idea but I sometimes need more than one copy to run at the > same time so that won't work. File locking is about the only option I can > see. >> If you need to run more than one rsync over the same tree at the s

Re: File Locking

2008-08-18 Thread Paul Slootman
our situation. > > >> --Kyle > > Thanks for the idea but I sometimes need more than one copy to run at the > same time so that won't work. File locking is about the only option I can > see. If you need to run more than one rsync over the same tree at the same

File Locking

2008-08-18 Thread lists
> A different Kyle wrote: > I have a situation that requires the files that rsync is > uploading/downloading to be locked. The reason is because it is possible > to have more than one copy of rsync running and without file locking, > the additional copies simply retry to upload/

Re: File Locking

2008-08-18 Thread Kyle Lanclos
A different Kyle wrote: > I have a situation that requires the files that rsync is > uploading/downloading to be locked. The reason is because it is possible > to have more than one copy of rsync running and without file locking, > the additional copies simply retry to upload/download

File Locking

2008-08-18 Thread lists
copy of rsync running and without file locking, the additional copies simply retry to upload/download a file that a previous copy is already working on. What I am hoping for is a way for rsync to notice that the file is already being copied and therefore move on to the next file. I fo

Re: File locking for simultaneous rsync sessions

2008-02-14 Thread Matt McCutchen
s. > > Is there any sort of locking mechanism built in into rsync to prevent > this from happening? Rsync does no file locking. Multiple rsync processes writing concurrently to the destination generally won't make a terrible mess since each process updates a file by writing the new data t

File locking for simultaneous rsync sessions

2008-02-14 Thread Andrew Culver
Hello all, I have two web servers both mounting the same file system (with GFS). I have a third web server which is independent from the first two, using only its own local file systems. I need to mirror a directory within the shared file system on the first two web servers to the local file s

Re: Strange file locking behaviour

2006-09-30 Thread Paul Slootman
On Thu 28 Sep 2006, Aaron Hawryluk wrote: > > Bit of a sticky situation - we use rsync to mirror files from a remote > staging server to our development server (both on Linux). The mirroring > works fine, however, while the rsync process is running, our apache service > on the destination system

Strange file locking behaviour

2006-09-28 Thread Aaron Hawryluk
Hi all,   Bit of a sticky situation – we use rsync to mirror files from a remote staging server to our development server (both on Linux).  The mirroring works fine, however, while the rsync process is running, our apache service on the destination system can’t access the files.  Is rsync

RE: File Locking under Windows - a solution ?

2006-09-06 Thread Michael Pickard
> -Original Message- > From: Stuart Halliday [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 05 September 2006 15:25 > To: rsync@lists.samba.org > Subject: Re: File Locking under Windows - a solution ? > > > Does anyone know of a way this locking can be overridden ? - is i

RE: File Locking under Windows - a solution ?

2006-09-06 Thread Tevfik Karagülle
What about using some staging logic if you have enough disk space and can introduce the logic required into your system : 1. Keep two copies of your files on your live servers: FEED-A and FEED-B 2. Initialization a. rsync FEED-A and FEED-B with the preview server content b. Select FEED-A

RE: File Locking under Windows - a solution ?

2006-09-06 Thread Michael Pickard
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 06 September 2006 05:03 > To: Michael Pickard > Cc: rsync@lists.samba.org > Subject: RE: File Locking under Windows - a solution ? > > Try to access the lock file using "Windows s

RE: File Locking under Windows - a solution ?

2006-09-05 Thread milutin
Hello, We are currently using Rsync (with cygwin) to propagate static files from a preview server (Windows) to our live servers (Windows) on demand. Unfortunately, because the live servers are *live*, inevitably some of the files we mean to update are in use and therefore locked by the windows

Re: File Locking under Windows - a solution ?

2006-09-05 Thread Stuart Halliday
> Does anyone know of a way this locking can be overridden ? - is it > possible to 'force' updates ? it is important that all live servers > have identical filesystems. I doubt it. Windows Filing system doesn't work that way. You can buy open file managers. But these are designed to allow a file

File Locking under Windows - a solution ?

2006-09-05 Thread Michael Pickard
We are currently using Rsync (with cygwin) to propagate static files from a preview server (Windows) to our live servers (Windows) on demand. Unfortunately, because the live servers are *live*, inevitably some of the files we mean to update are in use and therefore locked by the windows fi