Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 09:44:56 -0700 (PDT) From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: hubs@freebsd.org Cc: will@physics.purdue.edu Subject: Re: ftp-master method Message-ID: <200105041644.f44GiuO54477@vashon.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <20010502161330.B5017@casimir.physics.purdue.edu> References: <20010502161330.B5017@casimir.physics.purdue.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <20010502161330.B5017@casimir.physics.purdue.edu>, Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu> wrote: > OK, so people have problems with either mirror/spegla+ftp and rsync. > How about cvsup? I've suggested this a few times myself. I haven't heard any arguments against it, but nobody ever seems to consider it seriously for this application. It wouldn't be hard to try it and find out how well it works. > It uses the rsync algorithm with some optimizations, Well, to be fair, I doubt it compresses quite as well as rsync. (Rsync is tuned better.) But CVSup probably streams better, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was faster overall in terms of elapsed time. > and can be configured to have a maximum number of deletions, and has > several methods of excluding files. It also requires little memory, All true. > although it does hurt when it comes to cpu. Hmm -- maybe, maybe not. It uses a lot of CPU for dealing with RCS files, because it parses them and edits them and generally spends a lot of time grokking them. The rsync algorithm is much simpler, so CVSup's CPU usage should be better for that case. John -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hubs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200105041644.f44GiuO54477>