Most likely OT: rsync to cifs mount

[Ranjan Maitra]

Thanks, Cameron! 


> If you are using a CIFS share, does that mean the far end is not a UNIX 
> filesystem? The -S (sparse) option is only useful if the backend can store 
> sparse files, otherwise the backend will just store lots of blocks of zeroes 
> (presuming you really have sparse files).

The filesystem is a "high-end" IFS filesystem according to our systems administrator. (I have no idea what an IFS filesystem is.) 

> 
> Is the source kmeans directory full of hard links (not symlinks)? If so, rsync 
> will not preserve hard links without the -H option (even with -a) and 
> regardless I do not know if CIFS supports making hard links or if your backend 
> supports hard links).

No, there are no hard links. Only a few files at the top level and about 4 directories with lots of files in them.

> If the far end is windows, certainly sparse files will no longer be sparse at 
> the far end. This kind of thing is one reason we get so picky when getting 
> employers to order NASes; we asked for a QNAP (cheap, useful, Linux backend) 
> and they wanted to order Microsoft's storage thingummy, which would have broken 
> all sorts of stuff just like what you're encountering.

I suspect that that is what has happened here: the stuff is too high-end to be of any use.

> >Does anyone have an explanation and solution for the above? I apologize again for the largely OT nature of this post.
> 
> Seems on topic to me.

Thanks! 

> Does anything above assist?

Yes, it does, at least providing a possible explanation. 

I don't think it would make any difference if we tar'ed the file over to the cifs share and then untarred, would it? 

Many thanks again!

Best wishes,
Ranjan

____________________________________________________________
FREE 3D EARTH SCREENSAVER - Watch the Earth right on your desktop!
Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth