Re: efficient file appends

2001-12-13 Thread rsync
>This really is a minor point because as Martin pointed out, the fact that >rsync's pipelining would be defeated means that the idea would have a >drastic effect on throughput. Okay, everyone has convinced me that my problem (excessive traffic in the reverse direction) is best solved by simply sp

Re: efficient file appends

2001-12-13 Thread Dave Dykstra
Welcome to the rsync list, Phil. Martin and David provided excellent responses, but there's one more small point I want to make: On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 03:42:59PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... > The main drawback I can see to exchanging hashes by > default is the extra receiver CPU time c

RE: efficient file appends

2001-12-12 Thread David Bolen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] writes: > >While potentially a useful option, you wouldn't want the protocol to > >automatically always check for it, since it would preclude rsync on > > This extension need not break any existing mechanism; if the hash of > the receiver's copy of the file d

Re: efficient file appends

2001-12-12 Thread Martin Pool
On 12 Dec 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >While potentially a useful option, you wouldn't want the protocol to > >automatically always check for it, since it would preclude rsync on > > This extension need not break any existing mechanism; if the hash of > the receiver's copy of the file doesn'

Re: efficient file appends

2001-12-12 Thread rsync
>While potentially a useful option, you wouldn't want the protocol to >automatically always check for it, since it would preclude rsync on This extension need not break any existing mechanism; if the hash of the receiver's copy of the file doesn't match the start of the sender's file, the protoco

RE: efficient file appends

2001-12-12 Thread David Bolen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] writes: > It seems to me that this situation is common enough that the rsync > protocol should look for it as a special case. Once the protocol has > determined from differing timestamps and/or lengths that a file needs > to be synchronized, the receiver shou

Re: efficient file appends

2001-12-12 Thread Martin Pool
On 12 Dec 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > It seems to me that this situation is common enough that the rsync > protocol should look for it as a special case. Once the protocol has > determined from differing timestamps and/or lengths that a file needs > to be synchronized, the receiver should re