rsync or rdist

[Aubin, Jean-Francois]

use rsync witch a switch -ropcl.
 Ex: rsync -ropcl --stats --progress /rep_src
username at other_srv:/storage/archive

rsync with this method is very safe, checksum verify .... We also use
with a generated ssh key.


J-F Aubin
 
Le mardi 11 mars 2008 à 12:47 +0100, Herta Van den Eynde a écrit :
> 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."