From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 26 08:54:45 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27D3C16A4CE for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 08:54:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out011.verizon.net (out011pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.135]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5A0D43D1F for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 08:54:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from mac.com ([68.160.247.127]) by out011.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.06 201-253-122-130-106-20030910) with ESMTP id <20040426155442.ITKF18566.out011.verizon.net@mac.com>; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 10:54:42 -0500 Message-ID: <408D30BA.6090105@mac.com> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 11:54:34 -0400 From: Chuck Swiger Organization: The Courts of Chaos User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tim McMillen References: <20040413224607.O5427@grond.sourballs.org> <1082896542.28050.4.camel@taxman> In-Reply-To: <1082896542.28050.4.camel@taxman> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out011.verizon.net from [68.160.247.127] at Mon, 26 Apr 2004 10:54:41 -0500 cc: David Fleck cc: FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: mirroring: cvsup vs. rsync X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 15:54:45 -0000 Tim McMillen wrote: > On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 03:57, David Fleck wrote: [ ... ] >>The thing that surprises me is that I also tried mirroring the same >>repository with rsync (using the -az options), and rsync is *much* faster, >>so far the speed increases for rsync are on the order of 5X. >>This makes me wonder if I'm using CVSup right. > > Well I'm not sure if you are, I don't know the bowels of cvsup, but I do > know rsync is a much more efficient protocol. 5x seems a little > excessive, but not that surprising I guess. Rsync and cvsup are solving somewhat different problems. You can use cvsup against a server to obtain the files by different CVS tag or by timestamp (the tag= and date= parameters in a supfile), whereas rsync can only copy a checked-out workarea or the CVS repo itself. Try comparing cvsup and rsync where cvsup in in CVS mode, not in checkout mode... -- -Chuck