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

Re: Strange rsync issue




"J.A. Bezemer" wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
> > [snip, commands seem correct]
> > > This took more than 12 hours and the progress indicator never came
> > > over 2% done.
> > > Can someone please tell me what could be the bottleneck and why the second
> > > rsync took longer that the first one.
> > If you never got to the full 100% (or perhaps 99%), it is a good
> > posibility that you never synced the entire image.
> Correct, and if rsync stops (or is killed) without the transfer being
> complete, it deletes its tempfile and essentially leaves everything unchanged.
> So the big file you saw after rsyncing only 2% was still your pseudo-image.
> (Note that this is the intentional behaviour; otherwise you would have had
> only 2%=13MB left, and would have had to re-create the pseudo-image.)

Ok. I tried rsyncing for the second time from ftp.se.d.o .
After apr. 10 hours it finished with >600 Mb data read ( .3 $ per Mb )
It said that 23 Mb data was matched.
MD5 sum didn't match.
( 13d1c3648285fc4119c497aff3c0e205 binary-i386-1_NONUS.iso )
( Might it be that this is md5 sum if no -b key is used ? )

Rsyncing again (blocksize=65536).
It froze after 3 hours on 98% after transferring another 300+ Mb.
(It's not killed yet)
That's it. I'll better find someone to ftp it to Latvia so I can grab it
on free, national traffic.
Is there a way I can get rsync temp file and what is in the file-to-rsync.
BTW It is a Win2000 Professional

-- 
Mail You Later!

        Aigarius
    aigarius@zednet.lv

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Origin: Not enough hard drive space... please delete windows. PLEASE!!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org


Reply to: