On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 12:43:05PM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote:
> An obvious change that could be made would be to count how much
> data came over the link versus how much came from the local file and
> choose from this ratio which file to save when interrupted
There is some code in rsync that atte
On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 09:50:37AM +0100, Manuel Mollar wrote:
> If from client I do again the same command, then, in server the 400Mbyte
> file is COPIED to another temporary file, but this take some time.
> I from client I press crtl-C when in server temporary file is not
> already copied, say
Tx for your response, but I am not interested on such reading :-)
My concussion is rsync must be used with more care than necessary
jw schultz wrote:
On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 09:50:37AM +0100, Manuel Mollar wrote:
Hi,
Sorry if this is well known.
Suposse I am transferring a large (by now) file,
On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 09:50:37AM +0100, Manuel Mollar wrote:
> Hi,
> Sorry if this is well known.
> Suposse I am transferring a large (by now) file, say 1Gbyte with --partial:
> rsync -e ssh -a --partial 1gbfile server:
> If process is interrumpted, temporary file is renamed to good filename
>
