[Bug 11067] New: add --min-depth and --max-depth options

Matthias Schniedermeyer ms at citd.de
Thu Jan 22 14:01:58 MST 2015

On 22.01.2015 14:32, Joe wrote:
> Maybe a bit off topic. (I don't deal with any data even remotely that
> large.)
> How would you use these new options - just as a way to break large tasks
> into smaller "batches"?
> If rsync "stops in the middle", then the target would be in a sort of
> limbo where it might not be fully usable.

If i would guess.

The description say to me: "big fat storage system underneath".
Which means: "Bandwith limited" by a singular rsync process.

First you do a "--max-depth=2" (or so) run to set a basis.
Then you can do several "-min-depth=2" runs (for different parts) in 
parallel, to get the blood of the storage system pumping.
That also uses more than 1 CPU, which a singular rsync would be limited 
If you have a "big fat" server with a truckload of cores and an 
I/O-System that can do several GB/s, the about 500MB/s i get on my 
personal computer for a singular rsync is a limiting factor.

Or just think about the upcoming PCIe NVMe SSDs that can do several GB/s 
(and plug several of them into a computer). You need several rsync 
processes to spread the I/O load over enough CPUs just for duplicating a 
single such SSD to another, if you want to do that in the shortest time 

> On 01/22/2015 09:38 AM, samba-bugs at samba.org wrote:
> > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11067
> >
> >             Bug ID: 11067
> >            Summary: add --min-depth and --max-depth options
> >            Product: rsync
> >            Version: 3.1.1
> >           Hardware: All
> >                 OS: All
> >             Status: NEW
> >           Severity: enhancement
> >           Priority: P5
> >          Component: core
> >           Assignee: wayned at samba.org
> >           Reporter: chip at innovates.com
> >         QA Contact: rsync-qa at samba.org
> >
> > As file systems are getting bigger and bigger, into the multiple petabyte scale
> > rsync is not scaling well, but is still the tool of choice when migrating
> > filesystems from one storage vender to another.
> >
> > Adding --min-depth and --max-depth options to control what directory depth
> > rsync will operate on would allow better targeted rsync processes.
> >



More information about the rsync mailing list