From: | Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | David(dot)Bear(at)asu(dot)edu, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PITR with rsync |
Date: | 2007-08-07 15:37:02 |
Message-ID: | 46B8919E.7030408@pinpointresearch.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
> If you are going over an ssh connection then scp seems like the
> appropriate tool. Yeah, rsync would work, but it's just a useless
> extra layer of software...
Actually, rsync has one edge over scp even where its other attributes
are moot: atomicity.
Rsync keeps the data in a temporary location then moves the whole file
into place at the conclusion of a successful transfer. Scp, however,
creates the file at start of transfer and that file will continue to
grow as the transfer progresses. A failure part-way through a scp
transfer will leave an incomplete file on the receiving end.
For situations where a process on the receiving side watches for and
processes newly added files or situations where I require a reliable
all-or-none transfer such as distribution of configuration files, I use
rsync.
Of course this attribute of rsync means that updates of an existing file
require sufficient disk-space for both old and new versions of the file.
Cheers,
Steve
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2007-08-07 16:35:54 | Re: PITR with rsync |
Previous Message | pingu.freak | 2007-08-07 15:34:53 | Re: Transaction-Overflow |