Hi,

I have a quick question. I back-up my Slack 10.2 box using an rsync script to another linux server on a 100MB network running the rsync daemon.

Which would be quicker - continue to run it this way with the daemon, or to mount a folder on the server using NFS and run the rsync client without the daemon?

Anyone have any experience with this?


M.

Only anecdotal. nfs is pretty light-weight & efficient. rsync can run through ssh or rsh - it will probably be slower over ssh assuming you're using a cipher, probably about the same over rsh.

If the computers are fast enough, you may be able to eek out a bit more performance from rsync because you can compress the data before it hits the pipe (-z option), especially over a slower network; but if they are slow[er] machines, then compressing the data will only slow things down on a 100Mb network.

I'd just keep on with the rsync method. rsync is nice in that you can always pick up where you left off.

Hi BrianK,

Thank you for your reply.

I think you're right - I'll continue to use the daemon.

However, I also backup to a BSD box running rsyncd over a VPN. I think I'll use the -z option for this.

The receiving box is quite slow though. Will this make a difference?


M.

If you're going over a VPN, I would guess that means this is not a local connection, but over the internet? If that's the case, then -z will almost always be faster.