On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 7:05 AM, Joseph L. Brunner
j...@affirmedsystems.com wrote:
our investigation showed the rsync process even with all switches we found
has to open the file a bit before it copies it... so rsync sucks for this
kind of stuff with 2 MILLION small files - it never gets
2015-01-23 11:44 GMT+02:00 Götz Reinicke - IT Koordinator
goetz.reini...@filmakademie.de:
Hi,
I do have two centos 6.6 servers. With a performance optimized rsync I
get an speed of 15 - 20 MB/s
The options I use are:
rsync -aHAXxv --numeric-ids --progress -e ssh -T -c arcfour -o
...@centos.org] On Behalf Of
Gordon Messmer
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 06:40 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] network copy performance is poor (rsync) - debugging
suggestions?
On 01/23/2015 01:44 AM, Götz Reinicke - IT Koordinator wrote:
I do have two centos 6.6 servers
On 28-01-2015 21:39, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 01/23/2015 01:44 AM, Götz Reinicke - IT Koordinator wrote:
I do have two centos 6.6 servers. With a performance optimized rsync I
get an speed of 15 - 20 MB/s
That *is* pretty slow for sustained writes. Does the same rate hold
true for individual
On 01/23/2015 11:10 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
I'm not certain what the problem could be. But enabling jumbo packets
would be the fist thing I would try
Jumbo frames are an excellent option if your system is spending a lot of
time processing interrupts, which is why I asked about the hi value
On 01/23/2015 10:54 AM, Patrick Flaherty wrote:
Not an expert in rsync/ssh, but I'm pretty sure it's ssh's tcp window size
that is the slowness.
Probably not? TCP window size is usually only a problem if the sender
is capable of sending more data than the window size before the receiver
On 01/29/2015 09:09 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
our investigation showed the rsync process even with all switches
we found has to open the file a bit before it copies it
Rsync is going to read the directory tree first, then walk it on
both sides comparing timestamps (for incrementals) and block
On 01/28/2015 09:47 PM, Charles Polisher wrote:
Add this parameter: --bwlimit=0
That's the default, so it's unlikely to change anything.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 01/23/2015 01:44 AM, Götz Reinicke - IT Koordinator wrote:
I do have two centos 6.6 servers. With a performance optimized rsync I
get an speed of 15 - 20 MB/s
That *is* pretty slow for sustained writes. Does the same rate hold
true for individual large files as it does for lots of small
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 03:39:50PM -0800, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 01/23/2015 01:44 AM, Götz Reinicke - IT Koordinator wrote:
I do have two centos 6.6 servers. With a performance optimized rsync I
get an speed of 15 - 20 MB/s
Add this parameter: --bwlimit=0
I do have two centos 6.6 servers. With a performance optimized rsync I
get an speed of 15 - 20 MB/s
The options I use are:
rsync -aHAXxv --numeric-ids --progress -e ssh -T -c arcfour -o
Compression=no -x
If I copy files by smb to/from the servers I do get 60 - 80 MB/s, a dd
(r/w) on the
On Fri, January 23, 2015 12:54 pm, Patrick Flaherty wrote:
I do have two centos 6.6 servers. With a performance optimized rsync I
get an speed of 15 - 20 MB/s
The options I use are:
rsync -aHAXxv --numeric-ids --progress -e ssh -T -c arcfour -o
Compression=no -x
If I copy files by smb
Hi,
I do have two centos 6.6 servers. With a performance optimized rsync I
get an speed of 15 - 20 MB/s
The options I use are:
rsync -aHAXxv --numeric-ids --progress -e ssh -T -c arcfour -o
Compression=no -x
If I copy files by smb to/from the servers I do get 60 - 80 MB/s, a dd
(r/w) on the
13 matches
Mail list logo
