[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RSYNC issues

On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 10:34:06AM -0400, Null wrote:
Not that I have any clue what you are doing, but something looks totally

> Here is the result of a typical RSYNC sessionfor me:
> H:\>rsync --verbose --progress --stats --block-size=8192
hmm, dos? does that work with the long filenames?
> aurolinux.mit.edu::debian-cd/2.2_rev0/i386/binary-i386-1.iso .
> Out of environment space
are you running some kind of mc clone? maybe it (rsync is a batch?) wants to
set environment variables and can not. Give it more env space maybe? And do
not use mc, nc, dcc, whatever, you can not set envs under DOS when you run
mc clones.

> (MIT disclaimer in here)
> binary-i386-1.iso
> 658926947 (99%)
> ERROR: file corruption in binary-i386.iso. File changed during transfer?
> Number of files: 1
> Number of files transferred: 1
> Total file size: 658929664 bytes
> Total transfered file sized: 658929664 bytes
> Literal data: 638482432 bytes
> Matched data:20447232 bytes
> Files list size: 40
> Total bytes written: 484815
> Total bytes read: 638572493
> wrote 484815 bytes  read 638572493 bytes 59884.49 bytes/sec
> total size is 658929664 speedup is 1.03
Speedup 1.03 is practically no speedup at all. When you use the pseudo image
kit (you do use that, don't you?) you get a speedup of 20 at least. Plus you
are not transfering the whole image, which is what you are doing, when you
look at the transfered filee sizs/bytes written. You are perverting the idea
of rsync, its shall be used to decrease the network load, you are creating
the full network load plus a lot of CPU load on the rsync mirror. IMHO.

Why don't you buy a CD? Oh yeah, network is cheaper than CDs in the US...

Reply to: