[OT] - Backing Up Windows XP to Linux
bart.plug at whiteley.org
Wed Oct 4 18:01:29 MDT 2006
On 10/4/06, Michael L Torrie <torriem at chem.byu.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 15:12 -0400, brianhks at activeclickweb.com wrote:
> > This is bad. If you mount the drive you may as well use cp or copy or
> > xcopy. The real strength of rsync is its extremely low level of
> > network traffic to sync the data. To do this rsync does checksums on
> > the data so if you run it over a mounted volume it will read all of
> > the date across the wire. Rsync runs best when there are two
> > instances of rsync running, one on each machine to be synchronized.
> > This way only checksums are passed over the wire before any data is
> > copied.
> I've heard this before, but I don't think it's true, based on my
> experience. I can rsync between two disks physically in my system and
> it doesn't read much data at all off the local disk except to copy new
> files. If what you're saying is true about how rsync works, then it
> wouldn't work at all for local rsyncs (wouldn't save time). I think
> rsync only checksums if it has to. Could someone who is an rsync expert
> clarify this for me?
Man page indicates that rsync uses file size and mod-time by default.
Force checksums instead with -c.
More information about the PLUG