bug on --partial
wayned at samba.org
Mon Dec 29 07:43:05 EST 2003
On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 09:50:37AM +0100, Manuel Mollar wrote:
> If from client I do again the same command, then, in server the 400Mbyte
> file is COPIED to another temporary file, but this take some time.
> I from client I press crtl-C when in server temporary file is not
> already copied, say is 200 Mbyte, temporary file overwrites the 400Mbyte
> file, losing a lot of data.
Yes, the way the --partial option handles an interruption is pretty
crude. An obvious change that could be made would be to count how much
data came over the link versus how much came from the local file and
choose from this ratio which file to save when interrupted (which would
avoid the sub-optimal scenario you cite above).
Another future optimization that I've considered would be to delay
creating the temporary file until the point we discover that the new
file differs from the old. If one or both of the files was at EOF at
that point, we could then do an optimized update (append, truncate, no
update needed). If the difference occurs at a non-EOF spot, we'd just
copy the data from the old file into the temp file and proceed as
normal. Such a change would have lots of little pitfalls to get right
(such as twiddling permissions during appending to a read-only file),
but it might be do-able without getting too complicated.
These are some of the things we can look into after we get 2.6.0 out the
More information about the rsync