Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement an ignore-size option to force copy operations to execute even... #22

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

cbrinker
Copy link

@cbrinker cbrinker commented Dec 4, 2013

... if the file is the same size. This is useful when using createrepo as the repomd.xml is sometimes the same size on disk, but comprised of different hashes.

…ven if the file is the same size. This is useful when using createrepo as the repomd.xml is sometimes the same size on disk, but comprised of different hashes.
@drohr
Copy link

drohr commented Feb 18, 2014

Actually ran in to the exact same issue with repomd.xml. I solved this a bit hacky using s3put on the specific repomd.xml files. All other files change in size or name. Not sure if the option should be ignore-size, it is bascially making boto-rsync not doing any rsyncing any more. A better solution would be to add an option to actually check md5 on specific files or all files (this can be an issue if you have billions of files in your s3 bucket)

@cbrinker
Copy link
Author

I am evaluating the new awscli py package provided by AWS as a replacement
for boto-rsync, s3put, s3cmd, etc.

-Chris

On Tuesday, February 18, 2014, David Röhr [email protected] wrote:

Actually ran in to the exact same issue with repomd.xml. I solved this a
bit hacky using s3put on the specific repomd.xml files. All other files
change in size or name. Not sure if the option should be ignore-size, it is
bascially making boto-rsync not doing any rsyncing any more. A better
solution would be to add an option to actually check md5 on specific files
or all files (this can be an issue if you have billions of files in your s3
bucket)

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/22#issuecomment-35392733
.

@seedifferently
Copy link
Owner

@cbrinker Nice to see that AWS has finally stepped up to the plate with something like this.

I have some time coming up in a bit and I thought I might revisit this package, but now I'm not entirely sure that's necessary. Please let me know how your evaluation goes.

@otemnov
Copy link

otemnov commented Apr 25, 2014

Would like to get this feature in!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants