On Fri 28 Oct 2005, Anban Mestry wrote:
> Amazing. Connecting to the NFS server directly instead of through a
> mount results in much better transfers. Thank you. It looks like just
> the updated portions of the files are zoomed across.
That is the case...
> A dumb question, but why? Does the rs
Amazing. Connecting to the NFS server directly instead of through a
mount results in much better transfers. Thank you. It looks like just
the updated portions of the files are zoomed across.
A dumb question, but why? Does the rsync daemon on the server side
have anything to do with this? Or does t
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 07:27:09PM +0200, Anban Mestry wrote:
> rsync -avtz --no-whole-file \test1\ \mnt\test2\
You don't want to do that, because --no-whole-file optimizes rsync's
socket I/O at the expense of disk I/O, which means that you're making
things less efficient when the "connection" bet
Hi,
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, Anban Mestry wrote:
I'm not sure if anyone has experienced this, and I have searched for
it online, with no conclusive, err.. conclusions.
Basically, when rsyncing two \test1(local) and \mnt\test2\ (NFS mount)
it seems that when using rsync with --no-whole-file entire
Hey all,
I'm not sure if anyone has experienced this, and I have searched for
it online, with no conclusive, err.. conclusions.
Basically, when rsyncing two \test1(local) and \mnt\test2\ (NFS mount)
it seems that when using rsync with --no-whole-file entire files
(instead of just updated blocks)
