Sstrhsrtj

I have been using a rsync script to synchronize data at one host with the data at another host. The data has numerous small-sized files that contribute to almost 1.2TB.

In order to sync those files, I have been using rsync command as follows:

rsync -avzm --stats --human-readable --include-from proj.lst /data/projects REMOTEHOST:/data/

The contents of proj.lst are as follows:

+ proj1

+ proj1/*

+ proj1/*/*

+ proj1/*/*/*.tar

+ proj1/*/*/*.pdf

+ proj2

+ proj2/*

+ proj2/*/*

+ proj2/*/*/*.tar

+ proj2/*/*/*.pdf

...

...

...

- *

As a test, I picked up two of those projects (8.5GB of data) and I executed the command above. Being a sequential process, it tool 14 minutes 58 seconds to complete. So, for 1.2TB of data it would take several hours.

If I would could multiple rsync processes in parallel (using &, xargs or parallel), it would save my time.

I tried with below command with parallel (after cding to source directory) and it took 12 minutes 37 seconds to execute:

parallel --will-cite -j 5 rsync -avzm --stats --human-readable {} REMOTEHOST:/data/ ::: .

This should have taken 5 times less time, but it didn't. I think, I'm going wrong somewhere.

How can I run multiple rsync processes in order to reduce the execution time?

Following steps did the job for me:

1. Run the rsync --dry-run first in order to get the list of files those would be affected.

rsync -avzm --stats --safe-links --ignore-existing --dry-run --human-readable /data/projects REMOTE-HOST:/data/ > /tmp/transfer.log

2. I fed the output of cat transfer.log to parallel in order to run 5 rsyncs in parallel, as follows:

cat /tmp/transfer.log | parallel --will-cite -j 5 rsync -avzm --relative --stats --safe-links --ignore-existing --human-readable {} REMOTE-HOST:/data/ > result.log

Here, --relative option (link) ensured that the directory structure for the affected files, at the source and destination, remains the same (inside /data/ directory), so the command must be run in the source folder (in example, /data/projects).

I would strongly discourage anybody from using the accepted answer, a better solution is to crawl the top level directory and launch a proportional number of rync operations.

I have a large zfs volume and my source was was a cifs mount. Both are linked with 10G, and in some benchmarks can saturate the link. Performance was evaluated using zpool iostat 1.

The source drive was mounted like:

mount -t cifs -o username=,password= //static_ip/70tb /mnt/Datahoarder_Mount/ -o vers=3.0

Using a single rsync process:

rsync -h -v -r -P -t /mnt/Datahoarder_Mount/ /StoragePod

the io meter reads:

StoragePod  30.0T   144T      0  1.61K      0   130M

StoragePod  30.0T   144T      0  1.61K      0   130M

StoragePod  30.0T   144T      0  1.62K      0   130M

This in synthetic benchmarks (crystal disk), performance for sequential write approaches 900 MB/s which means the link is saturated. 130MB/s is not very good, and the difference between waiting a weekend and two weeks.

So, I built the file list and tried to run the sync again (I have a 64 core machine):

cat /home/misha/Desktop/rsync_logs_syncs/Datahoarder_Mount.log | parallel --will-cite -j 16 rsync -avzm --relative --stats --safe-links --size-only --human-readable {} /StoragePod/ > /home/misha/Desktop/rsync_logs_syncs/Datahoarder_Mount_result.log

and it had the same performance!

StoragePod  29.9T   144T      0  1.63K      0   130M

StoragePod  29.9T   144T      0  1.62K      0   130M

StoragePod  29.9T   144T      0  1.56K      0   129M

As an alternative I simply ran rsync on the root folders:

rsync -h -v -r -P -t /mnt/Datahoarder_Mount/Mikhail/Marcello_zinc_bone /StoragePod/Marcello_zinc_bone

rsync -h -v -r -P -t /mnt/Datahoarder_Mount/Mikhail/fibroblast_growth /StoragePod/fibroblast_growth

rsync -h -v -r -P -t /mnt/Datahoarder_Mount/Mikhail/QDIC /StoragePod/QDIC

rsync -h -v -r -P -t /mnt/Datahoarder_Mount/Mikhail/sexy_dps_cell /StoragePod/sexy_dps_cell

This actually boosted performance:

StoragePod  30.1T   144T     13  3.66K   112K   343M

StoragePod  30.1T   144T     24  5.11K   184K   469M

StoragePod  30.1T   144T     25  4.30K   196K   373M

In conclusion, as @Sandip Bhattacharya brought up, write a small script to get the directories and parallel that. Alternatively, pass a file list to rsync. But don't create new instances for each file.

I personally use this simple one:

ls -1 | parallel rsync -a {} /destination/directory/

Which only is usefull when you have more than a few non-near-empty directories, else you'll end up having almost every rsync terminating and the last one doing all the job alone.

A tested way to do the parallelized rsync is: http://www.gnu.org/software/parallel/man.html#EXAMPLE:-Parallelizing-rsync

rsync is a great tool, but sometimes it will not fill up the available bandwidth. This is often a problem when copying several big files over high speed connections.

The following will start one rsync per big file in src-dir to dest-dir
on the server fooserver:

cd src-dir; find . -type f -size +100000 | 

parallel -v ssh fooserver mkdir -p /dest-dir/{//}; 

  rsync -s -Havessh {} fooserver:/dest-dir/{} 

The directories created may end up with wrong permissions and smaller files are not being transferred. To fix those run rsync a final time:

rsync -Havessh src-dir/ fooserver:/dest-dir/ 

If you are unable to
push data, but need to pull them and the files are called digits.png
(e.g. 000000.png) you might be able to do:

seq -w 0 99 | parallel rsync -Havessh fooserver:src/*{}.png destdir/

For multi destination syncs, I am using

parallel rsync -avi /path/to/source ::: host1: host2: host3:

Hint: All ssh connections are established with public keys in ~/.ssh/authorized_keys