accurate progress for UI
rdutoit at capecod.net
Wed Jan 30 11:35:51 GMT 2008
On Jan 30, 2008, at 3:46 AM, Paul Slootman wrote:
> Do note that disabling the incremental recursion will impact the
> performance, esp. with a large number of files.
I did some tests (I am becoming the OSX rsync_3 benchmark guy!) and
for 15GB Home folder, there was only a slight difference in
performance but see that could grow considerably with larger numbers.
Without incremental recursion, the initial file count seems to take
forever, though it catches up a bit after that. The incremental
backups are almost the same in speed at this size. The one option, I
mentioned before, that does seem to affect performance is the osx-
creation-dates patch. Oddly, it is much slower for the incremental
backup scans (2+ times) than for the initial full copy, proportionally.
I think I leave the --no-i-r- option as an option since I now include
a text field for roll-your-own options in the UI. Half of the people
want these things decided for them in the code but a lot have asked if
rsync could do this or that, so now everyone can be happy. Me too.
As for the UI progress bar with the recursion, I will represent the #
of files copied per increment count and leave out any mention of size
copied (since that was always just an extrapolation for # of files.)
That will give a true idea of what rsync is really doing. And maybe I
can fool the progress bar into slowing down the initial race forward.
Thanks, Rob Dutoit
More information about the rsync