5 ms·
You need a -z to activate compression. But, nonetheless, please always use rsync when copying host to host.
by stevvooe 14y ago
You need a -z to activate compression. But, nonetheless, please always use rsync when copying host to host.
- inyourtenement 14y agorsync is slow if the data is not already on the destination. tar over ssh is fast, and tar over socketpipe is even faster but not encrypted. I'm not aware of any attributes that tar doesn't preserve.
- ce4 14y agoThere's cryptcat if you need encryption. "bar" is also a nice little program if you like to see an ETA (c.f. http://clpbar.sourceforge.net/ http://clpbar.sourceforge.net/ )
- kbenson 14y agoHow so? Also, I find that if I'm going to copy the data once, I'm often going to copy it twice, or which to get a more up to date version of it at a later time. Rsync clearly wins in these cases. Finally, from the compress flag on rsync: Note that this option typically achieves better compression ratios than can be achieved by using a compressing remote shell or a compressing transport because it takes advantage of the implicit information in the matching data blocks that are not explicitly sent over the connection.
- moe 14y agoRsync is brilliant and useful but gets very slow when you apply it outside of its sweet-spot. Remember: Rsync trades CPU and disk i/o (lots of disk i/o) for network bandwidth. In the pathological case "thousands of tiny files over a fast network" it can easily be orders of magnitude slower than a straight tar.
- morsch 14y agoSeems like -W disables the delta transfer.
- inyourtenement 14y agoExactly right. In my use cases, it's best to tar over ssh initially. Then, if I ever want to update the copy, rsync.