You need to explicitly enable it. (-z)
-Original Message-
From: rsync [mailto:rsync-boun...@lists.samba.org] On Behalf Of Charles
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 7:32 AM
To: rsync@lists.samba.org
Subject: Re: What is the default compression level for local synchronisation?
On 05/10/15 17:3
I work at a remote site, and I often use rsync to copy Unix application
directories from the corporate site, to my own.
Often these directories are minor revisions of previous installations.
(ie: /base/app/1.1, /base/app/1.2 /base/app/1.2.1 )
I can make a copy of the previous directory
But the timestamp would not.
-Original Message-
From: rsync-boun...@lists.samba.org [mailto:rsync-boun...@lists.samba.org] On
Behalf Of Kyle Lanclos
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 5:06 PM
To: billdorr...@pgatourhq.com
Cc: rsync@lists.samba.org
Subject: Re: Problem syncing to Netapp (rsync:
I have to rsync files between a pair of NAS over a WAN, and since each NAS has
an administrative server, we do the rsync 'server-to-server' using SSH.
-Original Message-
From: rsync-boun...@lists.samba.org [mailto:rsync-boun...@lists.samba.org] On
Behalf Of Chris Arnold
Sent: Wednesday,
And, although rsync does parallelize, nothing stops you from running multiple
instances of rsync.
I had to transfer files from system A to system B, and being limited by the
processing power of a single thread of rsync, I drilled down one level, and ran
rsync's against each the first level file
The first clause should read "does not parallelize".
-Original Message-
From: rsync-boun...@lists.samba.org [mailto:rsync-boun...@lists.samba.org] On
Behalf Of Stier, Matthew
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 3:07 PM
To: Kevin Korb; rsync@lists.samba.org
Subject: RE: Rsync takes
Another issue is that rsync and find are single threaded applications. No
matter how many processors/cores/threads the system has, each invocation of
find or rsync will use only one thread.
You can gain some parallelization by stepping up a level in the directory and
running running find's or
There’s more to the issue, than simply splitting the files among N workers.
All the directories would need to transferred first. You wouldn’t want worker
“D” trying to copy a file, before worker “C” was able to create the directory
to hold it.
There is also the issue of hard links. Where would
Or softlinks, if you use the '--copy-links' option.
This has two other advantages:
One: The links are self documenting. (With hard links you have to search for
inodes.)
Two: The sync source directory does not have to be in the same filesystem as
the original files.
-Original Message
