## Ron Johnson (ron.l.john...@cox.net):
> > On today's LANs, total archiving time is dominated by connection
> > startup time (how long does it take to transfer 16MB on a 10GbE link?
> > See...).
>
> And if we've only got a WAN link from one DC to another 360 miles away?
Well... TCP handshake wi
On 08/27/2017 02:23 PM, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote:
## Ron Johnson (ron.l.john...@cox.net):
Everything I've read says that you should use "rsync -a". Is there
any reason why we can't/shouldn't use "rsync -az" so as to reduce
transfer time?
On today's LANs, total archiving time is dominate
## Ron Johnson (ron.l.john...@cox.net):
> Everything I've read says that you should use "rsync -a". Is there
> any reason why we can't/shouldn't use "rsync -az" so as to reduce
> transfer time?
On today's LANs, total archiving time is dominated by connection
startup time (how long does it take t
Hi,
(Yes, its old. Nothing I can do about that.)
Everything I've read says that you should use "rsync -a". Is there any
reason why we can't/shouldn't use "rsync -az" so as to reduce transfer time?
Also, does that change require a full restart (difficult with production
systems)?
Thanks
