rsync or rdist

[Herta Van den Eynde]

On 10/03/2008, peter winterflood <peter.winterflood at ossi.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Herta Van den Eynde wrote:
> > On 10/03/2008, Rodrick Brown <rbrown at ballistasec.com> wrote:
> >
> >> tar cvfp - . | ssh -c blowfish remote '(cd /storage/archive; tar xvf -
> )'
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: redhat-list-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:
> >> redhat-list-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Mad Unix
> >> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 9:29 AM
> >> To: General Red Hat Linux discussion list
> >> Subject: Re: rsync or rdist
> >>
> >> any one have acript to do the remote transfer ...
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Herta Van den Eynde <
> >> herta.vandeneynde at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 10/03/2008, Mad Unix <madunix at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I need a script transfer archive log files from Production site
> >>>> Server1  to DR site Server2 on the same subnet
> >>>> i want to sync the files between /arc with /storage/archive on both
> >>>> servers ....
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> madunix
> >>>>
> >>> AFAIK, rdist copies entire files. rsync only copies the blocks that
> are
> >>> different.
> >>>
> >>> Note also that you can run rsync through ssh for a more secure
> transfer.
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards,
> >>>
> >>> Herta
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> "Life on Earth may be expensive,
> >>> but it comes with a free ride around the Sun."
> >>> --
> >>> redhat-list mailing list
> >>> unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request at redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
> >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> madunix
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> > Looks like a complicated way to do what a simple 'scp -pr source target'
> > will accomplish.  Or am I missing something?
> >
> > Rodrick does have a point, though: if you simply want to copy new files
> from
> > server A to server B, a simple copy will be faster than rsync, as you
> don't
> > need the comparison phase.  But scp will be faster than the tar -
> transfer -
> > untar.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Herta
> >
> >
> >
>
> well if scp inherits the same limitation of rcp -r then it wont take
> links with it.
> tar picks up all links, but does not follow them.
>
> I would always use a variation of the tar command given above for
> complete directory copies, from one system to another, however would add
> the "B" modifier to the example given above to ensure that tar Blocks
> for pipes/network.
>
> However rsync would be a much better option if say a DR host needs to be
> kept in sync with a production, as rsync can be configured to to
> incremental updates, ie only copy changes, and where files are deleted
> on the source delete them at the dest, maintaining a complete mirror of
> two directories across a network.
> it could be cron's to run every few mins.
>
> regards peter
>

You're right, Peter.
Both scp and rsync ignore softlinks to files, and hardlinks are converted to
regular files.  Named pipes aren't copied properly either.

Kind regards,

Herta

-- 
"Life on Earth may be expensive,
but it comes with a free ride around the Sun."