On 5/8/2010 4:16 AM, Gordon Henderson wrote: > On Fri, 7 May 2010, Brian K. White wrote: > > >>> (I think using blowfish makes it a bit quicker - it's a lighter weight >>> encryption and needs less CPU - personally, I'd rather use rsh on a >>> private LAN, but that's a debate for elsewhere ;-) >>> >>> >> Why even use rsh? I just use rsync itself, no ssh or rsh. It's great. >> > Hm. you've got me thinking now... > > > From what I know, rsync uses ssh by default. This was changed from rsh > some years back. You can force rsh with the -e or --rsh parameters - but > that means setting up rsh. So if you just use rsync, then it will be using > ssh already. > > However, there is a mode whereby the remote site can run an rsync daemon, > but even then I think it still needs some sort of transport module - ie > ssh, but I've just glossed over the man page without really taking much > in. I know what works for me ;-)tar piped into ssh (or rsh!) is even faster - > I sometimes use that for the first initial copy. Actually, I have a copy of a > 100GB container to do > this weekend between 2 hosts on 100Mb networking. I'll run some tests :) >
Yes I meant the daemon mode. As for the speed of initial copies, that's what -W and --inplace are for. On 100Mb you definitely want -z too. -- bkw ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Lxc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxc-users
