On 1/13/2010 5:54 PM, Joseph L. Casale wrote:
Anyone got any actual comparisons between unison and rsync specifically related to the performance of synchronization of large data sets over slow links?
I have a huge tree to start replication of Friday and know that if I sync the root paths it will take ages and with the lack of any overall state of progress this won't be optimal as its likely to fail for whatever reason before it can finish. Initially I just thought I would break it down to several smaller jobs but that becomes a burden to maintain...
We use bacula internally but sending the diffs would be cumbersome as the individual files would be rather large...
I didn't think unison was maintained any more - and I wouldn't expect anything to beat rsync with the -z option on a slow link. I'd just use the -P option and restart it when/if it fails. It wouldn't hurt to do subsets first since they will be quickly skipped when you repeat from the root. If you have a huge number of files it might be worth finding a way to update rsync to a 3.x version which will not need to xfer the entire directory listing before starting.