Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, August 24, 2021 9:40 PM, Kevin Korb wrote:
> Most of the speedup is due to ssh being bound to a single CPU. You will
> get a little more speed out of a single CPU system but the speedup is
> unlikely to go past
Most of the speedup is due to ssh being bound to a single CPU. You will
get a little more speed out of a single CPU system but the speedup is
unlikely to go past 2 in parallel. Even with that you may end up adding
more latency via disk seeks to accomplish much.
On 8/24/21 5:12 PM, hancooper
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, August 24, 2021 9:12 PM, hancooper via rsync
wrote:
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Tuesday, August 24, 2021 8:25 PM, Kevin Korb via rsync
> rsync@lists.samba.org wrote:
>
> > In my experience backing up multiple hosts to a single host can
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, August 24, 2021 8:25 PM, Kevin Korb via rsync
wrote:
> In my experience backing up multiple hosts to a single host can speed
> things up. Especially if using rsync over ssh with multiple CPUs on the
> single host. You would need to do some
In my experience backing up multiple hosts to a single host can speed
things up. Especially if using rsync over ssh with multiple CPUs on the
single host. You would need to do some experimentation to determine the
best number for your hardware and network. Also, if you exceed that
number you
It makes sense to we to run multiple rsync commands to speed up a backup.
At work, some have argued that if I sync the data all to the same host, there
is no advantage
in parallelization. Whether you sync 3x 1G in parallel or 1x 3G makes no
noticeable difference.
Speed in general does not
