Thanks all who replied.
So to conclude: rsync does the delta stuff i need, but it writes the
destination file completly new instead of patching the deltas.
Unfortunatly i have a offline database where i need a tool which does a
simple compare of fixed size blocks and modifies only the changed
On 21 Feb 2002, Oliver Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after some searching i didn't came up with an answer so please excuse if this
> is a total newbie question.
>
> My problem:
> I have server A which has a big (>500G) database like file. On server B i
> want to have a copy of th
On 21 Feb 2002, Joseph Annino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is cool. You can't really tell that this is what is going on from
> reading the man page.
I'd really like to improve the state of documentation for rsync. The
man page has grown organically and is not really appropriate for the
cur
It uses a "rolling" checksum, so that it can actually find byte-level
changes, insertions, deletions. There's a block size for how big a chunk
to start with, but then it works within those to figure out where to make
the changes. It's hyper-efficient. The thing about transferring whole
file
Keep in mind that rsync always generates a complete copy of the file on the
receiver side, it doesn't actually modify the file; it takes chunks out of
the original file and combines them with the changed chunks sent from the
receiver to make a new file, and when it's all done it deletes the old
on
This is cool. You can't really tell that this is what is going on from
reading the man page.
On 2/21/02 10:55 PM, "Tom Diehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Joseph Annino wrote:
>
>> But I thought rsync will always copy the complete file, not just the
>> differences. So the
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Joseph Annino wrote:
> But I thought rsync will always copy the complete file, not just the
> differences. So the checksums are for the complete file, and if the
> complete file checksum doesn't match, the complete file is transferred.
> That isn't whats desired here, just t
Joseph Annino wrote:
> If my understanding is wrong and rsync does have the proper magic to copy
> just the differences within a file then rsync is even cooler than I thought.
rsync is cooler than you thought!
Randy Kramer
--
To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/lis
But I thought rsync will always copy the complete file, not just the
differences. So the checksums are for the complete file, and if the
complete file checksum doesn't match, the complete file is transferred.
That isn't whats desired here, just the differences WITHIN a file.
If my understanding
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 07:27:20PM -0500, Joseph Annino wrote:
> The big problem is when diffs are usually done, you need to compare every
> bite in both files to find the deltas. So in a network situation you
> wouldn't save any effort because everything would have to go across the
> network any
I don't think rsync could do that. I would think it could possibly be
efficient about transferring files where new data kept on being appended at
the end, if you used some tricky combo of command line switches with
--partial and other hacks.
The big problem is when diffs are usually done, you ne
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 10:37:13PM +0100, Oliver Krause wrote:
> My problem:
> I have server A which has a big (>500G) database like file. On server B i
Does "database like" mean it'll be in use when the rsync job runs?
What about data in memory - that's not flushed to disk?
[If you're talking
Hi,
after some searching i didn't came up with an answer so please excuse if this
is a total newbie question.
My problem:
I have server A which has a big (>500G) database like file. On server B i
want to have a copy of this file which i don't want to copy each time but
sync the deltas so that
13 matches
Mail list logo
