More a matter of working intelligently...
...though it's a bit hard to see how this would be done without\r\nforcing some work on the part of rsync.
\r\n\r\n
One athought is that I'm actually doing more work than if I'd simply\r\ncopied the files. If rsync has to compute a hash or checksum from the\r\nsource files, then I have to read the remote files anyway, and\r\nI'd be better off simply copying them, rather than reading them,\r\ncomputing a checksum, then re-reading them for the copy.
\r\n\r\n
OTOH, if rsync can look at a file and say "the size and modification\r\nitmestamps are consistent with the existing copy I'm supposed to be\r\ncomparing this to, let's punt and say the files are the same". In the\r\nlatter case, I'd be seeing some significant benefits.
\r\n\r\n
Moving 10 GiB across a network in four minutes isn't bad for a day's\r\nwork.... Hell, it took ~15 minutes just to get linecounts of the data\r\n(granted, gunzipping it to a pipeline), so I guess I'm getting my\r\nmoney's worth.
\r\n
