topic Re: failing to copy file more than 2GB : rsync error: hp-ux 11.11 in Operating System - HP-UX

failing to copy file more than 2GB : rsync error: hp-ux 11.11

rveri — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 22:09:16 GMT

Hi Experts,

While copying the entire directory , I have noticed that it is faling when it reach around 2100+MB, exisiting with the below error.,

I was monitoring the temp file , that start with a . , and fails after 2GB of copy :

# rsync -avz /hpux220/oracle/data3/ hpux200:/oracle/data3/

building file list ... done
./
dmd620_1/dmd620.data1
rsync: writefd_unbuffered failed to write 16385 bytes [sender]: Broken pipe (32)
write failed on smd620_1/smd620.data1 : Error 0
rsync error: error in file IO (code 11) at receiver.c(243)
rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (283 bytes read so far)
rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at io.c(150)
rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (24 bytes received so far) [sender]
rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at io.c(463) [sender=2.6.8]

Files are like this: :
-rw-r----- 1 3338 201 2768248832 Nov 3 11:30 dmd620_1/dmd620.data1

#what /usr/bin/rsync :
/usr/bin/rsync:
$Revision: 92453-07 linker linker crt0.o B.11.66 080610 $

# hp-ux 11.11

# FS: largefile enabled:
# fsadm /oracle/data3
fsadm: /etc/default/fs is used for determining the file system type
nomultifsets
largefiles

Pleae advise is it rsync limitation , or some other problem,
else what can be done do copy it. Is tar going to help.

Thanks in advance..

Re: failing to copy file more than 2GB : rsync error: hp-ux 11.11

Fabian Briseño — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 22:48:34 GMT

Hello rveri.
this is a filisystem issue, largefiles must be enabled on the filisystem you are copying files to.

Re: failing to copy file more than 2GB : rsync error: hp-ux 11.11

D. Jackson_1 — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 23:04:23 GMT

Make sure the destination mount point allows for largefiles and was mounted that way.

Re: failing to copy file more than 2GB : rsync error: hp-ux 11.11

rveri — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:03:25 GMT

Fabian , it is already enabled: check above the output:

# fsadm /oracle/data3
fsadm: /etc/default/fs is used for determining the file system type
nomultifsets
largefiles

2nd thing,
I have tried: I can copy more than 2 GB file using , tar -cf - and tar -xf command . I copied sucessfuly a 4.2GB and 2.8 gb files to the filesystem from the same source using NFS mount and tar.
So why not rsync can copy the same?

Re: failing to copy file more than 2GB : rsync error: hp-ux 11.11

Steven Schweda — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 03:24:33 GMT

> #what /usr/bin/rsync :
> [...]

Knowing who linked rsync is probably less
useful than knowing the actual rsync version.

rsync --version

Is there a newer version available with
better large-file support?

> So why not rsync can copy the same?

Perhaps because rsync is a different program,
and it (your copy of it) may not have been
built with large-file support enabled. But
my psychic powers are very weak, and I know
nothing useful about your rsync program.

> I was monitoring the temp file [...]

Which was where? (On a file system with
enough free space?)

If you like the way "tar" works, why not use
"tar"?

Re: failing to copy file more than 2GB : rsync error: hp-ux 11.11

rveri — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 07:01:54 GMT

Steven,
Thanks,

# /usr/bin/rsync --version
rsync version 2.5.5 protocol version 26
Copyright (C) 1996-2002 by Andrew Tridgell and others
<>
Capabilities: 64-bit files, socketpairs, hard links, symlinks, batchfiles,
no IPv6, 32-bit system inums, 64-bit internal inums

rsync comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. This is free software, and you
are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions. See the GNU
General Public Licence for details.
#

(your copy of it) may not have been
built with large-file support enabled. Make sense to me.

Re: failing to copy file more than 2GB : rsync error: hp-ux 11.11

Steven Schweda — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 07:25:21 GMT

I know nothing, but "64-bit files" sounds
like what it should have.

> rsync version 2.5.5 protocol version 26
> Copyright (C) 1996-2002 [...]

That does look pretty old, however, so I'd
probably try something closer to current
before giving up.

> [...] [sender=2.6.8]

Does that look like a different version on
the other end?