DO NOT REPLY [Bug 3392] fuzzy misbehaving if source is a file
samba-bugs at samba.org
samba-bugs at samba.org
Wed Mar 15 16:27:40 GMT 2006
------- Comment #11 from wayned at samba.org 2006-03-15 10:27 MST -------
I appreciate than in your specific circumstance that an enhance behavior of
--fuzzy would be useful. My testing of the --fuzzy option has also included
large transfers with many missing files where it would be a huge detriment. For
instance, I have tried to use --fuzzy to transfer a large Maildir hierarchy,
and the copy into a very large and active folder was so CPU intensive that it
bogged the transfer down instead of speeding it up. This is because every
missing file requires its own separate fuzzy computation, and that computation
gets slower the more files there are in the destination directory. So, the
--fuzzy option is already too CPU intensive for its own good in some
Given that, I don't want the file-set that fuzzy compares against to be made
larger by default. It could possibly be made an optional behavior, e.g.
requested by doubling the --fuzzy option, but that suggestion would best be
made in a separate enhancement request (since it's best to target a bug-report
at a specific issue, and this specific issue of the wrong directory being
scanned for fuzzy matches has been fixed).
Finally, some discussion of bug-tracking netiquette: please note that reopening
a bug report twice in a row is considered to be a very rude action. While that
might not make much sense logically, rudeness is more emotional than logical. I
was once chastised for reopening a bug just once to ask a question that I
thought might not have been considered in the closing of the bug. At the time I
thought that the fellow was being overly dramatic, but after some experience of
being on the other side, I realized that the reopening action actually conveys
meaning that may not be intended by the reopener. Thus, a good rule of thumb
when dealing with a bug that is not in obvious need of being reopened is this:
Add a comment to the closed bug raising the issue. Check for a concensus for
reopening or starting a new bug report. If there is no response, reopening
might be needed to ensure that the issue is not forgotten.
OK? Thanks for you input, and feel free to open an enhancement request for the
--fuzzy option if you'd care to do so.
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
More information about the rsync