Also sorry idk if there is an intro thread or anything, but I've been a lurker for a while this has been my first actual post I think. I don't know if I should reply all or just send my reply to the GNHLUG email address?
Anyways just quickly, I'm Tony and I'm in ad tech. We use machine learning to help advertisers optimize their ROI. At first I thought it would be lame, but at least it was a job, but gradually I have become more and more interested in ad tech and it is actually kinda cool. Ok so hiii! On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:55 PM R. Anthony Lomartire < opensourcek...@gmail.com> wrote: > No offense or anything but I find it amusing that one of the most active > threads on this mailer has been about copying a bit of data :D > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 6:29 PM Matt Minuti <matt.min...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> My muscle memory always puts the flags "-avz" (sometimes I even remember >> to add a P in there), so there must have been one point in time where you >> had to specify compression. Might still be the case. >> >> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 12:02 PM mark <prg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> My mistake. I wrote encryption when I meant compression, as I belive >>> rsync always compresses--but I could be mistaken about that, too! >>> >>> Mark >>> On Jun 27, 2017 11:55 AM, "Tom Buskey" <t...@buskey.name> wrote: >>> >>>> rsync doesn't encrypt if there's no remote, as in this case. >>>> >>>> To be pedantic, rsync to remotes uses ssh by default but it can use rsh >>>> which has no encryption. Some older versions of SSH allowed you to specify >>>> the encryption. I recall using XOR encryption for faster operation where >>>> security was not needed. >>>> >>>> Encryption typically does some compression. If you compress 2x, you're >>>> doubling the bits through the pipe in the same time. If the >>>> encryption/compression computation at either end is faster than than the >>>> uncompressed bandwidth, you'll have faster throughput. That's very typical >>>> on newer multicore, high GHz CPUs. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 4:11 PM, mark <prg...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Locally, cp is faster because you cannot make rsync not encrypt, but >>>>> the restart-from-where-it-stopped feature of rsync makes it worth the >>>>> wait. >>>>> >>>>> Mark >>>>> On Jun 26, 2017 3:18 PM, "Charles Farinella" < >>>>> cfarine...@appropriatesolutions.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> We need to copy a large (200+GB) directory from one filesystem to >>>>>> another, both locally mounted. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm unsure as to what I should use to do this, cp, rsync, dd? >>>>>> >>>>>> Any suggestions appreciated. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>> >>>>>> --charlie >>>>>> >>>>>> Charlie Farinella >>>>>> Systems Administrator >>>>>> Appropriate Solutions, Inc. >>>>>> 1-603-924-6079 <(603)%20924-6079> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> gnhlug-discuss mailing list >>>>>> gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org >>>>>> http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> gnhlug-discuss mailing list >>>>> gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org >>>>> http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> gnhlug-discuss mailing list >>> gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org >>> http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> gnhlug-discuss mailing list >> gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org >> http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ >> >
_______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
