Le 12 juil. 2013 à 19:35, Wayne Davison a écrit :
> The fileio routines are usually reading 256K chunks except for the receiver,
> which tries to read 16K chunks (since it may be randomly accessing the file
> data in some cases).
Wayne, when the Rsync daemon accesses the data (randomly or not),
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 1:07 PM, AZ 9901 wrote:
> What about my 4K alignment question ? Don't you think it would even be
> faster ?
>
As I said in my last message, reads are in 256K chunks. So, no, alignment
won't affect that.
..wayne..
--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitt
Le 13 juil. 2013 à 14:42, AZ 9901 a écrit :
> Le 12 juil. 2013 à 19:35, Wayne Davison a écrit :
>
>> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 9:46 AM, CM Fields wrote:
>> Is rsync speed limited to 160MB/sec read speeds due to the chunk read size?
>> Or, are we seeing just a coinciden
Le 12 juil. 2013 à 19:35, Wayne Davison a écrit :
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 9:46 AM, CM Fields wrote:
>> Is rsync speed limited to 160MB/sec read speeds due to the chunk read size?
>> Or, are we seeing just a coincidence and the limitation is somewhere else?
>
> The fileio
.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 9:46 AM, CM Fields wrote:
>
>> Is rsync speed limited to 160MB/sec read speeds due to the chunk
>> read size? Or, are we seeing just a coincidence and the limitation
>> is somewhere
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 9:46 AM, CM Fields wrote:
> Is rsync speed limited to 160MB/sec read speeds due to the chunk
> read size? Or, are we seeing just a coincidence and the limitation
> is somewhere else?
>
The fileio routines are usually reading 256K chunks except for the
rec
Is rsync speed limited to 160MB/sec read speeds due to the chunk read
size? Or, are we seeing just a coincidence and the limitation is
somewhere else?
Rsync (single process) is used to locally copy files from one raid
partition to another and we noticed rsync's read speed is limited.
Whet
Hello,
$ rsync --version
rsync version 3.0.7 protocol version 30
When I transfer files with rsync (bzip2 files specifically), I get
6-11MiB/s on a 10Gbps network.
The same occurs on a gigabit network too incase you're wondering.
rsync:
r/1/b/l1/l1.root.ext4.dump.bz2
21168128 0%6.
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 1:04 AM, Max Arnold wrote:
> Is it worth to try development version in production or it is better to
> wait for stabilization?
>
I'm using the version from Dec 16th in one production setting that is easy
to monitor for problems, and it has been doing very well. I'm going
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:04:20AM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Max Arnold wrote:
> > in my tests rsync often stalls
> > for 3-5 minutes, while wget stalls only for several seconds and then
> > continues download.
Installed rsync-3.1dev snapshot from 20091222 on
On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 10:04 -0800, Wayne Davison wrote:
> Have you verified that rsync is actually stalled, and not simply
> sending incremental file-list information in between files? (e.g.
> strace rsync and see what it's doing.) You could try using
> --no-inc-recursive to see if doing all the
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Max Arnold wrote:
> in my tests rsync often stalls
> for 3-5 minutes, while wget stalls only for several seconds and then
> continues download.
Have you verified that rsync is actually stalled, and not simply
sending incremental file-list information in between f
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 02:23:26AM -0500, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 13:08 +0700, Max Arnold wrote:
> > I've noticed that rsync performs significantly worse than wget on slow
> > congested wireless
> > links (GPRS in my case). I don't have large statistics, but in my tests
> >
On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 13:08 +0700, Max Arnold wrote:
> I've noticed that rsync performs significantly worse than wget on slow
> congested wireless
> links (GPRS in my case). I don't have large statistics, but in my tests
> rsync often stalls
> for 3-5 minutes, while wget stalls only for several
Hello all!
I've noticed that rsync performs significantly worse than wget on slow
congested wireless
links (GPRS in my case). I don't have large statistics, but in my tests rsync
often stalls
for 3-5 minutes, while wget stalls only for several seconds and then continues
download.
Is there any
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of Julian Pace Ross
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 4:22 AM
To: Wayne Davison
Cc: rsync@lists.samba.org
Subject: Re: rsync speed
Pushing the file from Windows to
Pace RossSent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 4:22
AMTo: Wayne DavisonCc:
rsync@lists.samba.orgSubject: Re: rsync
speed
Pushing the file from Windows to Linux over ssh takes around 15 min, with an
average speed of ~400Kbps (using --progress).
Pulling the same file using the same arguments
Pushing the file from Windows to Linux over ssh takes around 15 min, with an
average speed of ~400Kbps (using --progress).
Pulling the same file using the same arguments takes around 45 mins, with an
average speed of ~150Kbps.
Do you mean pulling it back again from Linux to
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 09:43:50PM +0200, Julian Pace Ross wrote:
> Pushing the file from Windows to Linux over ssh takes around 15 min, with an
> average speed of ~400Kbps (using --progress).
>
> Pulling the same file using the same arguments takes around 45 mins, with an
> average speed of ~150K
Hi all,
I have a Windows server with rsync and cygwin, and I backup/restore files over ssh to a Linux server with rsync 2.6.8, over a 100Mbps LAN.
I have tried an experiment with one 350MB file:
Pushing the file from Windows to Linux over ssh takes around 15 min, with an average speed of ~400Kb
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 05:25:06PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I poked around the website and did some digging in the list archives but
> thought i'd better pose my question here.
>
> I'm using rsync to synchronize two directories on a Solaris 8 e450 server.
> rsync copies about 2
Hi,
I poked around the website and did some digging in the list archives but
thought i'd better pose my question here.
I'm using rsync to synchronize two directories on a Solaris 8 e450 server.
rsync copies about 22GB per night. It seems to take 50 minutes for the
copy to complete. which seems
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:03:34AM +0200, Mozzi wrote:
>
> Haile the list ;-)
>
> I am new to this list and this is my first post so grretings to all and
> nice to meet you.
>
> I am setting up rsync here to do a MASSIVE copy from one machine to the
> other.
> I am moving mail servers so I m
Haile the list ;-)
I am new to this list and this is my first post so grretings to all and
nice to meet you.
I am setting up rsync here to do a MASSIVE copy from one machine to the
other.
I am moving mail servers so I must copy /var/spool/mail/ over to the
other machine.
I understand and hav
What happens if you do a "dry run", i.e. with the -n option? That way you
can tell if it's network-related. I've found that network speed with
cygwin stuff is pretty sad. For example, using Tridge's socklib network
speed test (bewdiful - thanks Tridge!), I get 2MB/s under Win2k+cygwin,
vs. 10MB/
Hello !
I want to do a backup of some Win98-Workstations to a Linux-Server. I
compiled rsync for Windows using Cygwin 1.18 and the instructions in
win95.txt. All worked fine, but it is terribly slow !!!
For testing purposes I took two machines, one with linux, the other
with linux and win98. I w
26 matches
Mail list logo
