4 ms·
No, I didn't use compression. Would it be useful over a high-bandwidth connection? I presume that it wasn't wifi bandwidth that was bottlenecking, though I've n
by dmos62 3y ago
No, I didn't use compression. Would it be useful over a high-bandwidth connection? I presume that it wasn't wifi bandwidth that was bottlenecking, though I've not really checked.
One thing I could have done is found a way to track total progress, so that I could have noticed that this is going way too slow.
- skinner927 3y agoI’ve had compression noticeably speed things up even over a wired lan
- mixmastamyk 3y agoOne of the options of rsync is to print out transfer speed, --progress or verbose or similar.
- dmos62 3y agoYeah, I did that, but that shows stats per file, which is minimally useful. I would see it go up to 15 mb/s for bigger files, but turns out the aggregate speed was less than 10 mb/s.
- mixmastamyk 3y agoRight, I guess it doesn't show the total speed until the end, which is probably too late. Although 15MB/s is not very fast these days either. Elsewhere I recommended the Thunderbolt4 cable—it screamed at ~10GBs and didn't need any optimization like tar/compression.
- maccard 3y agoI wouldn't consider 10MB/s high bandwidth. My home wifi network can comfortably handle 35MB/s, while a wired connection is 110MB/s+ > No, I didn't use compression. Would it be useful over a high-bandwidth connection? Compression will be useful if you're IO bound as opposed to CPU bound, which at 10MB/s you definitely are.
- dmos62 3y agoThanks for the clarification. I presumed that it's the rsync+ssh protocol chatter that was slowing me down, not the wifi bandwidth (which I've not tested separately ). I don't have my head wrapped around the mechanics in play, to be honest.