> If you are going over an ssh connection then scp seems like the > appropriate tool. Yeah, rsync would work, but it's just a useless > extra layer of software... Actually, rsync has one edge over scp even where its other attributes are moot: atomicity. Rsync keeps the data in a temporary location then moves the whole file into place at the conclusion of a successful transfer. Scp, however, creates the file at start of transfer and that file will continue to grow as the transfer progresses. A failure part-way through a scp transfer will leave an incomplete file on the receiving end. For situations where a process on the receiving side watches for and processes newly added files or situations where I require a reliable all-or-none transfer such as distribution of configuration files, I use rsync. Of course this attribute of rsync means that updates of an existing file require sufficient disk-space for both old and new versions of the file. Cheers, Steve ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
