ESTALE error while synching

[Matt McCutchen]

On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 09:35 +0530, Jignesh Shah wrote:
> Thanks Matt but I think that should not be a correct behavior. The
> rsync
> should retry the ESTALE files rather than giving errors immediately
> and
> deleting the files untimely.

ESTALE means the source file was deleted while rsync was reading it.
(That's what I meant by untimely; rsync itself isn't deleting anything.)
There's no point in retrying a deleted source file.  I suppose rsync
could treat the file as vanished, but that would require a protocol
change to inhibit the receiver from applying the update without causing
the redo or (if already redoing) exit code 23 that sending a bad
checksum normally would.

-- 
Matt

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Matt McCutchen
<matt at mattmccutchen.net>wrote:
> 
> >  On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 15:49 +0530, Jignesh Shah wrote:
> > > Hi, I am wondering how rsync-3.0.6 react if it encounters ESTALE
> error
> > > while synching? If I remember correctly then the rsync-2.6.0
> skipping
> > > that file/dir in case of ESTALE error.
> >
> > If rsync encounters any kind of error reading a source file, it will
> > report the error (causing an eventual exit code of 23) and skip the
> > actual update to the destination file, unless --inplace was
> specified,
> > in which case the update has already been done.  A second rsync run
> will
> > clean up any mess resulting from untimely deletion of source files.
> >
> > --
> > Matt