<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Craig Bell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Craig.Bell@standard.com">Craig.Bell@standard.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">That's interesting! I tried this, --del does indeed behave strictly "infix" when both paths are local.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>No, there's no difference in how the deletions occur, but there is a difference in how the output makes it to the screen between a pull (where both the generator and the receiver output) and a push (where only the sender outputs). A local transfer is done as a push, thus the difference you saw between that and a remote pull you had done.</div>
<div><br></div><div>That doesn't change how the deletions happen, though. The generator goes through its list of files, visiting each directory, and telling the sender what files need to be transferred. Before processing a directory for transfers, it processes the directory for deletions. What you are seeing is just that the generator has time to delete files far ahead of a set of new-file transfers (since it doesn't have any work to do for those transfers other than sending a "send this file" message to the sender).</div>
<div><br></div><div>So, in the case where the sender is outputting all the messages to the user, the generator's messages on what deletions have (already) happened get serialized into the transfer flow since the sender has to finish all the data-sending for the file requests before it can read the incoming messages (and output them) about what deletions the generator performed.</div>
<div><br></div><div>This pipe-lining isn't something that will change because it would slow things down to force the generator to stop and wait for the receiver to finish a set of transfers before looking for more work to do. Your work-around to send each directory separately seems like the best way for you to go given your strictures. It wouldn't be hard to tweak the code to make the incremental scan only send one directory at a time to the receiving side, but that is not something that I am going to fiddle with.</div>
</div><br>..wayne..<br>