Re: rsync --delete vs rsync --delete-after

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

>> > However, I have read that using rsync --delete instead of rsync --
>> > delete-after is faster and uses less memory, and so is more efficient. 
>> I'd be surprised if it makes a significant difference.
> If you use --delete-after (and some other options) then rsync has to
> check every file before it can do any work,

Oh, right, I was thinking of `--delete-delay`.
[ Tho, as you mention, the performance impact of `--delete-after` is
  also negligible in many cases.  ]


        Stefan