Rsync 3.0.0 report and a performance question.
langelino at gmx.net
Fri Feb 9 20:21:54 GMT 2007
Sorry for being so persistent....
Even with non-incremental file list generation (protocol=29) I get a
file list generation time of 80 sec but rsync still needs 12 min to
finish with (almost) no data to transfer. What is it doing the other
Paul Slootman wrote:
> On Wed 07 Feb 2007, Matt wrote:
>> Using --whole-file doesn't help, see below. BTW, rsync needs about the
>> same time even if no file has changes at all. It must be the
>> comparison of the file metadata. A rate 325 files/sec seems somewhat low
>> to me but maybe its mostly the time to read all directories and the
>> "File list generation time" in the stats doesn't account for this.
> When you're using incremental file list generation and transfer,
> accounting for the time specifically used for the generation only would
> probably use up more cpu time than the generation itself...
> I suggest that the values given for "File list generation time" and
> "File list transfer time" should be given as "n/a" (not applicable) when
> incremental file transfers are used.
> Paul Slootman
More information about the rsync