John,
I have used lftp for this test. The results are given below for the comparison (1gig LAN, 1gig WAN). You can share your results on bbcp and bbftp if you have. Application Size Time (Secs) Threads Speed MBps Latency (ms) Network lftp 36GB :1157 500 31.11495246 65 WAN lftp 36GB :1324 50 27.19033233 65 WAN lftp 36GB :5289 5 6.806579694 65 WAN lftp 36GB :3558 10 10.11804384 65 WAN lftp 36GB :1959 25 18.37672282 65 WAN lftp 36GB :1148 1 32.60869565 65 LAN lftp 36GB :496 25 72.58064516 <1 LAN lftp 36GB :427 50 84.30913349 <1 LAN lftp 36GB :422 25 85.30805687 <1 LAN lftp 4.4GB :241 500 18.25726141 65 WAN lftp 41GB :1466 50 27.96725784 65 WAN lftp 41GB :2304 25 17.79513889 65 WAN lftp -e 'pget -n 5 File_INDEX.dbf' sftp://root@remotehost/path. I installed hps-ssh but could not have much time to tune it and without any change I did not get any performance. I need more time for it. Thanks, Tika -----Original Message----- From: John Stoffel [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 4:22 PM To: Tika Mahata Cc: Maarten Ballintijn; stephen wadlow; [email protected] Subject: Re: [BBLISA] Large file transfer in 65ms latency Tika> Thank you guys for your inputs. They are really helpful to me. Let us know which solution you use and why if at all possible. Someone evaluating all three would be great. I only did bbcp and (just remembered now) bbftp in my testing and bbcp one out. I'd be happier of there was a better way to just keep the rsync and/or scp syntax the same, but automatically parallize connections. The patches to openSSH look interesting, but possibly they break things. John
_______________________________________________ bblisa mailing list [email protected] http://www.bblisa.org/mailman/listinfo/bblisa
