Paul Blackburn wrote:
> Peter,
>
> I think you will find that if the copy is run
> on the fileserver itself then the loopback
> address is used (eg data does not flow
> "across the wire"). This is a special
> case because I would normally expect
> only system administrators to have
> access to the fileserver.
Data flows from the fileserver process, to the cache manager, through the local
filesystem, and then back to the fileserver process again. It doesn't go "over
the wire", but it doesn't use the "lo" interface, either -- not that that would
provide a great savings. It's still very much slower than something like
"xcopy", if you're at all familiar with that.
