"intelligent" rsync scripts?

[Chris Shoemaker]

On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 09:07:51PM +0200, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Chris Shoemaker wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 08:12:30PM +0200, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
> 
> >>The first pass of "rename-without-modification" could even be much easier:
> >>size and timestamp should match.
> >
> >Eeek.  That's a bit too risky for my tastes.
> >I'd be comfortable with "Size && timestamp && (checksum || filename)"
> >but not just "Size && timestamp".
> 
> Surely. But this first pass would reduce the necessity for the 
> checksumming pass a lot.
> And the checksumming pass can stop on the first mismatch.

Maybe.  If sizes matched but timestamps didn't, I think I'd still
checksum and skip if matched.  OTOH, if sizes don't match, you /could/
skip the checksum.  It's a little more complicated since your receiver
checksums are then indexed differently than the sender checksums, but
it /would/ be cheaper.

-chris

> 
> Cheers -e
> -- 
> Eberhard Moenkeberg (emoenke at gwdg.de, em at kki.org)
> -- 
> To unsubscribe or change options: 
> https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
> Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html