From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 15 20:23:03 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED4C4DEF for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2013 20:23:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from st11p05mm-asmtp003.mac.com (st11p05mm-asmtp003.mac.com [17.172.108.248]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C37F62790 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2013 20:23:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cswiger1.apple.com (unknown [17.209.8.53]) by st11p05mm-asmtp003.mac.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.07(7.0.4.27.6) 64bit (built Jun 21 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0MRL009BV9YB4F50@st11p05mm-asmtp003.mac.com> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 15 Aug 2013 20:23:01 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8794,1.0.431,0.0.0000 definitions=2013-08-15_08:2013-08-15,2013-08-15,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1305240000 definitions=main-1308150143 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) Subject: Re: copying milllions of small files and millions of dirs From: Charles Swiger In-reply-to: <520D33D6.8050607@fjl.co.uk> Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 13:22:59 -0700 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Message-id: References: <7E7AEB5A-7102-424E-8B1E-A33E0A2C8B2C@gmail.com> <520D33D6.8050607@fjl.co.uk> To: frank2@fjl.co.uk, aurfalien X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 20:23:04 -0000 [ ...combining replies for brevity... ] On Aug 15, 2013, at 1:02 PM, Frank Leonhardt wrote: > I'm reading all this with interest. The first thing I'd have tried = would be tar (and probably netcat) but I'm a probably bit of a dinosaur. = (If someone wants to buy me some really big drives I promise I'll = update). If it's really NFS or nothing I guess you couldn't open a = socket anyway. Either tar via netcat or SSH, or dump / restore via similar pipeline are = quite traditional. tar is more flexible for partial filesystem copies, = whereas the dump / restore is more oriented towards complete filesystem = copies. If the destination starts off empty, they're probably faster = than rsync, but rsync does delta updates which is a huge win if you're = going to be copying changes onto a slightly older version. Anyway, you're entirely right that the capabilities of the source matter = a great deal. If it could do zfs send / receive, or similar snapshot mirroring, that = would likely do better than userland tools. > I'd be interested to know whether tar is still worth using in this = world of volume managers and SMP. Yes. On Aug 15, 2013, at 12:14 PM, aurfalien wrote: [ ... ] >>>>> Doin 10Gb/jumbos but in this case it don't make much of a hoot of = a diff. >>>>=20 >>>> Yeah, probably not-- you're almost certainly I/O bound, not network = bound. >>>=20 >>> Actually it was network bound via 1 rsync process which is why I = broke up 154 dirs into 7 batches of 22 each. >>=20 >> Oh. Um, unless you can make more network bandwidth available, you've = saturated the bottleneck. >> Doing a single copy task is likely to complete faster than splitting = up the job into subtasks in such a case. >=20 > Well, using iftop, I am now at least able to get ~1Gb with 7 scripts = going were before it was in the 10Ms with 1. 1 gigabyte of data per second is pretty decent for a 10Gb link; 10 MB/s = obviously wasn't close saturating a 10Gb link. Regards, --=20 -Chuck