sync performance falls off a cliff
carlos at fisica.ufpr.br
Sun Jul 5 21:34:56 GMT 2009
Leen Besselink (leen at consolejunky.net) wrote on 5 July 2009 10:17:
>> >I'm no expert, but I suggest using rsync 3.x (3.0.6 for example), it
>> >doesn't keep the as much information of the filelist in memory.
>> Yes. Or at lease it starts transfers much faster, because it doesn't
>> wait for the full list to be completed.
>> >It's probably swapping to disk, because of the large list and that
>> >significantly slows down the performance of the whole machine(s).
>> He's probably running out of ram, not only because of rsync but
>> also everything else. Since inodes and files are not in ram, they have
>> to be fetched from the disk, which is *very* slow.
>not ram per se, because this is what he said in a different e-mail:
>Today I've been watching the production 2.6.8 rsync off and on and no it
>isn't swapping. Used "vmstat" and "top" both on the source and
>the destination. Each shows 0 for si and so.
He *is* running out of ram for cache, so the machine has to get the
pages from disk, which is slow. Swap is not used because the pages are
More information about the rsync