[Bug 12769] New: error allocating core memory buffers (code 22) depending on source file system

samba-bugs at samba.org samba-bugs at samba.org
Fri May 5 13:54:02 UTC 2017


            Bug ID: 12769
           Summary: error allocating core memory buffers (code 22)
                    depending on source file system
           Product: rsync
           Version: 3.1.0
          Hardware: All
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P5
         Component: core
          Assignee: wayned at samba.org
          Reporter: mss-it at fau.de
        QA Contact: rsync-qa at samba.org

We run an openSuSE Leap 42.2 and an Ubuntu 14.04.5 on two servers. Copying a
large number of files (in this case about 28 million) leads to different
results depending on the source file system. 
We copy with rsync -rlptgoDAxHnP --info=progress2 --delete
--link-dest=$LINK_DEST root@$SERVER:/$FOLDER /backup/rsynctest/ . Replacing
--delete by --delete-delay doesn't change the behaviour as expected. The error
occurs with and without the option -n, in this case it is just for testing
reasons included.
In case the source is located on an Ext4 file system we run into the following
error message after about 26 million files copied:
ERROR: out of memory in hashtable_node [sender]
rsync error: error allocating core memory buffers (code 22) at util2.c(102)
In case the source is located on an XFS file system the above command copies
all files without error.
Both of the file systems hold the same data as the one is the backup copy of
the other. The behaviour appears as well when we use rsync via an rsync server
and not via SSH and as well when we copy locally on one of the two machines.
And it appears regardless of the operating system (openSuSE 42.2 or Ubuntu
I did not try in the last time but replaying the backup from an Ext4 showed
this error at least one year ago as well. With the change to XFS on the source
file system the error suddenly disappeared.
As the error appears even if just doing a --dry-run it seems to be related to
the way rsync handles metadata. The data size seems to be unimportant.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

More information about the rsync mailing list