mirroring: cvsup vs. rsync

Tim McMillen taxman at freedombi.com
Sun Apr 25 09:36:20 PDT 2004

On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 03:57, David Fleck wrote:
> I'm trying to set up a mirror of a CVS repository at a remote site.  The
> repository has 1000's of fairly small files, and is about 75MB in total
> size.
> This seemed like an obvious job for CVSup, so I got a recent version
> (16.1h) of the sources, built and installed on 2 Red Hat machines, one
> local and one remote, set up the server directories and files, and wrote a
> supfile for the client.  It seems to work ok.
> 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.

to the point that I'm not sure why rsync is not the preferred way of
updating ports and src trees.

Wikipeda, a free and open content encyclopedia

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list