I am going to try and de-Dan the conversation (make it about reality
rather than just Dan's opinion... he has a problem separating the two).
On Jun 26, 2007, at 9:51 PM, Dan Shoop wrote:
Why do I use rsync?? For backups?? Cause it's a great tool??
I'm not
sure
I understand the question.
You're right, you don't. Since if you did understand the question
you'd realize:
A) It's not a great tool
Rsync is a great tool, but has some real problems on MacOS X. Dan
just has never used it, so of course it is "bad".
B) it's highly problematic on OS X or any filesystem that's not
POSIX-esque
This is true, but it is better to say that it has problems with
things outside of the strict POSIX space. If you are just working
with the data fork of files, and can ignore ACL's then it is a great
tool.
C) It doesn't do "backups" but merely synchronizes directories and
files
But with a hard-link system it makes an excellent backup tool.
Basically a poor-mans snapshot system. Unix administrators have been
using this system for a long time. Dan has just never used it, so it
doesn't exist for him.
D) It is metadata lossy
E) It's luck it it's working and not barfing over itself in OS X
Once again... this is the exact same point as A, B, and D. It was
created when strict POSIX was about everything you needed to cover.
They are working on it, and Apple does need to put more resources
into this, or someone needs to go in and put the resources into
getting the darwin version whipped into shape.
But this all might be moot if Apple does indeed go down the ZFS
route, and gets ZFS to handle the metadata things that they need, and
gets the (near) live filesystem difference stream feature worked into
something useable.
