Ken Young writes:
Hello,[1;5BThe methods I know, 1. scp pros: the native tool in the OScons: you will either input password or put key pairs into servers for authentication.
Works for simple cases.
2. rsync pros: it can transfer data by increasement cons: you need to setup rsyncd server and make the correct authorization.
Works for simple and complex cases.
3. ftp/ftps pros: easy to use cons: need to setup ftpd server, and the way is not that secure?
Whenever possible, I'd prefer 1 or 2 over this.
4. rclone pros:easy to use cons: hard to setup (you may need a cloud storage for middleware).
I only use rclone when I want to target a cloud storage.A „cloud storage for middleware” does not seem sensible to me when I can copy using methods 1 and 2 without using such a middleware.
For me I most often use scp + rsync. and what's your choice?
These are my standard choices, too. In automated scenarios I often prefer rsync over scp due to more flexibility in configuration.
My additional tools for special purposes: 5. lsyncdIf you need to keep directories in sync continuously, there is a tool called `lsyncd` that automates repeated invocation of `rsync` in a smart way.
6. tar + netcat (or tar + ssh in very rare cases)Using tar sacrifices all the flexibility of rsync but may attain a significantly higher performance and does not need a lot of flags to do the right thing by default (i.e. preserve everything when acting as root). I prefer this variant when migrating to a new disk or PC because it seems to be the most efficient variant in a "local trusted network and no speedup from incremental copying" scenario.
I documented my approach to this here: https://masysma.net/37/data_transfer_netcat_tar.xhtml HTH and YMMV Linux-Fan öö
pgpX071P0Phsq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
