Welcome to the "rsync" mailing list

Jon jon at xraycommunications.com
Fri Nov 9 15:11:23 GMT 2007


Hello,

I have been using the rsync --stats switch to generate rudimentary
reports for a while now. I've recently noticed on a new machine I am
working with that there seems to be something wrong with the Number of
Files Transferred stat. Consider the following two sets of stats from
two different rsync sessions. The first session is the initial rsync
of a source point and the second is an rsync session run immediately
after the first:

Number of files: 352
Number of files transferred: 293
Total file size: 141674918 bytes
Total transferred file size: 141674918 bytes
Literal data: 141674918 bytes
Matched data: 0 bytes
File list size: 7775
Total bytes sent: 5876
Total bytes received: 141712661

sent 5876 bytes  received 141712661 bytes  503440.63 bytes/sec
total size is 141674918  speedup is 1.00

-------

Number of files: 352
Number of files transferred: 293
Total file size: 141674918 bytes
Total transferred file size: 141674918 bytes
Literal data: 0 bytes
Matched data: 141674918 bytes
File list size: 7775
Total bytes sent: 256212
Total bytes received: 179419

sent 256212 bytes  received 179419 bytes  58084.13 bytes/sec
total size is 141674918  speedup is 325.22

We can see from the literal data and the matched data from each
session that the first session transferred a large amount of data (as
expected for the initial rsync) and the second session transferred
nothing but overhead (again, as to be expected when the second rsync
is run so quickly that no files have changed). What I can't figure out
is why the stats still list 293 files as being transferred in both
cases.

This is a fairly straightforward rsync pulling from a CentOS4.5 box to
another CentOS4.5 using rsync 2.6.0 protocol version 29 on both sides.
I am using the command:

rsync -rv --stats root at server:/backup/* /home/backups

I apologize for the server obfuscation but I do not have permission to
post actual server names to the Internet.

Is this expected behaviour that I just haven't run across before?

Thanks

Jon


More information about the rsync mailing list