Sounds like he has the server folder mapped in Windows Explorer which is possibly the worst way to do it.
Perhaps he can install Dropbox or other cloud app on the server? They have Win and Lin versions. Provides a level of redundancy as well as the files will also be on the Dropbox servers. Otherwise Filezilla on the server and use FTP. Dragging files into a mapped drive is risky. On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Rory Conaway via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > Zip them into 1 file. > > Rory > > -----Original Message----- > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof via Af > Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2014 9:05 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [AFMUG] customer needs to upload lots of files ... best way? > > I have a customer who keeps asking for more upload speed because it > takes too long to upload a bunch of files to his server at a datacenter. > He thinks this should not cost a lot because he is just "bursting", > unfortunately what he wants would require a dedicated link from the > tower to his house. He will upload around 100 files when he finishes a > project and it takes about 20 minutes, apparently that's a problem. > What I see when he is uploading is about 50% duty cycle, apparently a > file uploads, then dead time, then another file. So I'm thinking he > first needs to improve how efficiently he uses his Internet connection. > > He says he is using drag and drop in Windows 7. I assume this means he > is using Remote Desktop and using drag and drop within the RDP session > from his local drive to a drive on the remote server. > > Would I be right that RDP drag and drop is not an efficient way to > transfer lots of files? (I've never done that myself.) What would be > the best way? > > Personally, I would just use FTP, maybe create a tar archive first, but > he is using Windows. If he needs security, it seems there are choices > like SFTP, FTPS, SCP. If HIPAA level security is not required, vanilla > FTP would avoid the encryption overhead. I found an article on how to > set the number of concurrent connections in Filezilla to something like > 10, would that keep the link 100% utilized? My other FTP client is > WS_FTP, I don't know if it can do concurrent file transfers. > > >
