Copy 1.6 TB of data from NAS on server1 to a NAS on server2
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I would like to know the quickest way to copy huge amount of data present on NAS of server1 to another NAS on server2. Both the servers are linux.
I'm thinking scp would be slow and take a lot of time ?
linux scp file-copy nas
asked May 28 at 7:15
Pavan K
1
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I would like to know the quickest way to copy huge amount of data present on NAS of server1 to another NAS on server2. Both the servers are linux.
I'm thinking scp would be slow and take a lot of time ?
linux scp file-copy nas
asked May 28 at 7:15
Pavan K
1
3
If it's a huge amount of data, usersyncto be able to restart where you left in case of failure.
– Gohu
May 28 at 7:31
These feels like a question asking for an opinion. Although I can say NFS, FTP and WebDAV would be fast for lots of small files. rsync and scp would be very slow for lots of small files. All of them are going to mostly even out if you have mostly large files. Furthermore running rsync at the end is generally a pretty good idea to check everything was copied.
– jdwolf
May 28 at 20:13
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I would like to know the quickest way to copy huge amount of data present on NAS of server1 to another NAS on server2. Both the servers are linux.
I'm thinking scp would be slow and take a lot of time ?
linux scp file-copy nas
asked May 28 at 7:15
Pavan K
1
I would like to know the quickest way to copy huge amount of data present on NAS of server1 to another NAS on server2. Both the servers are linux.
I'm thinking scp would be slow and take a lot of time ?
linux scp file-copy nas
asked May 28 at 7:15
Pavan K
1
asked May 28 at 7:15
Pavan K
1
asked May 28 at 7:15
Pavan K
1
asked May 28 at 7:15
Pavan K
1
1
3
If it's a huge amount of data, usersyncto be able to restart where you left in case of failure.
– Gohu
May 28 at 7:31
These feels like a question asking for an opinion. Although I can say NFS, FTP and WebDAV would be fast for lots of small files. rsync and scp would be very slow for lots of small files. All of them are going to mostly even out if you have mostly large files. Furthermore running rsync at the end is generally a pretty good idea to check everything was copied.
– jdwolf
May 28 at 20:13
add a comment |Â
3
If it's a huge amount of data, usersyncto be able to restart where you left in case of failure.
– Gohu
May 28 at 7:31
These feels like a question asking for an opinion. Although I can say NFS, FTP and WebDAV would be fast for lots of small files. rsync and scp would be very slow for lots of small files. All of them are going to mostly even out if you have mostly large files. Furthermore running rsync at the end is generally a pretty good idea to check everything was copied.
– jdwolf
May 28 at 20:13
3
3
If it's a huge amount of data, use
rsync to be able to restart where you left in case of failure.– Gohu
May 28 at 7:31
If it's a huge amount of data, use
rsync to be able to restart where you left in case of failure.– Gohu
May 28 at 7:31
These feels like a question asking for an opinion. Although I can say NFS, FTP and WebDAV would be fast for lots of small files. rsync and scp would be very slow for lots of small files. All of them are going to mostly even out if you have mostly large files. Furthermore running rsync at the end is generally a pretty good idea to check everything was copied.
– jdwolf
May 28 at 20:13
These feels like a question asking for an opinion. Although I can say NFS, FTP and WebDAV would be fast for lots of small files. rsync and scp would be very slow for lots of small files. All of them are going to mostly even out if you have mostly large files. Furthermore running rsync at the end is generally a pretty good idea to check everything was copied.
– jdwolf
May 28 at 20:13
add a comment |Â
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Â
draft saved
draft discarded
Â
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f446421%2fcopy-1-6-tb-of-data-from-nas-on-server1-to-a-nas-on-server2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
3
If it's a huge amount of data, use
rsyncto be able to restart where you left in case of failure.– Gohu
May 28 at 7:31
These feels like a question asking for an opinion. Although I can say NFS, FTP and WebDAV would be fast for lots of small files. rsync and scp would be very slow for lots of small files. All of them are going to mostly even out if you have mostly large files. Furthermore running rsync at the end is generally a pretty good idea to check everything was copied.
– jdwolf
May 28 at 20:13