SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

July 2014

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Konstantin Olchanski <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Konstantin Olchanski <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 14 Jul 2014 14:37:03 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 04:33:03PM -0500, Kevin K wrote:
> I guess I don't understand the part about how files can be different sizes on different filesystems.
> 
> They can obviously use up more or less disk space on different filesystems.  For instance, a FAT disk with 32KB clusters will use up a minimum of 32KB even for a 10 byte file.  While NTFS will probably put the 10 bytes in the directory entry or use up a maximum of 4KB for 4KB clusters.
> 
> But I don't see why rsync would care about the unused data.  It should just sync the 10 bytes accessible.  I'm ignoring alternate streams here.


This is the usual confusion between the "st_size" and "st_blocks" entries in "struct stat" returned by lstat() and co.


-- 
Konstantin Olchanski
Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow!
Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca
Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada

ATOM RSS1 RSS2