| |||||||||||||
A look at rsync performanceA look at rsync performancePosted Aug 20, 2010 11:53 UTC (Fri) by NAR (subscriber, #1313)In reply to: A look at rsync performance by pj Parent article: A look at rsync performance
A 'cp' command can also be easily modified to work over the network, just add an 's' to the front of 'cp' :-)
(Log in to post comments)
A look at rsync performance Posted Aug 20, 2010 12:28 UTC (Fri) by dsommers (subscriber, #55274) [Link]
True ... but if you have a lot of files, especially smaller files, the tar path with ssh is way faster than scp. Try copying a git repository (~2-3MB) from one site to another site. My experiences is that tar+ssh beats scp significantly.
A look at rsync performance Posted Aug 20, 2010 14:52 UTC (Fri) by spaetz (subscriber, #32870) [Link]
> but if you have a lot of files, especially smaller files, the tar path with ssh is way faster than scp. Try copying a git repository (~2-3MB) from one site to another site. My experiences is that tar+ssh beats scp significantly.
Only because you open a new ssh connection per file by default and tar+ssh opens only one. Which causes lots of overhead. If you reuse your ssh connection scp will be fast as well:
A look at rsync performance Posted Aug 21, 2010 2:05 UTC (Sat) by dmag (subscriber, #17775) [Link]
No, scp can't copy symlinks.
|
|||||||||||||