Roberto Ragusa wrote:
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Roberto Ragusa wrote:
john wendel wrote:
Looks like I'll spend a little time poking at F13 scp and see if I can
improve the transfer speed.
Maybe you are using compression? Compression is a disadvantage when
the network is fast (gigabit); you
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Roberto Ragusa wrote:
john wendel wrote:
Looks like I'll spend a little time poking at F13 scp and see if I can
improve the transfer speed.
Maybe you are using compression? Compression is a disadvantage when
the network is fast (gigabit); you just spend CPU time.
john wendel wrote:
Looks like I'll spend a little time poking at F13 scp and see if I can
improve the transfer speed.
Maybe you are using compression? Compression is a disadvantage when
the network is fast (gigabit); you just spend CPU time.
Then there is encryption. That can't be turned
Roberto Ragusa wrote:
john wendel wrote:
Looks like I'll spend a little time poking at F13 scp and see if I can
improve the transfer speed.
Maybe you are using compression? Compression is a disadvantage when
the network is fast (gigabit); you just spend CPU time.
Then there is
There actually is a patch to provide encryption none to improve speed and
reduce CPU for trusted connections.
That would be cool, but you can avoid this by rsyncing over an alternative
transport, like rsh to a remote rsync daemon which you can instantiate off
the cmd line trivially...
jlc
--
On 08/21/2010 12:52 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
john wendel wrote:
I've got a couple of boxes connected with wire and a gigabit ethernet
switch. With F11 on the sending and receiving sides, I see a transfer
speed of ~ 40 MB/s transfering large files. With F13 on the sending box
(same box, just
