On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Laura Creighton <l...@openend.se> wrote: > In a message of Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:47:42 +1100, Cameron Simpson writes: >>Another post suggests that the OP is transferring log info in UDP packets and >>hopes to keep the state within a maximum packet size, hence his desire for >>compact representation. I suspect that personally I'd be going for some >>efficient text encoding of the state and putting whatever compression he >>intends in the UDP throw/catch: >> >> take text log line >> compress >> send over UDP >> receive UDP packet >> decompress >> store in clear text >> >>or bypass UDP altogether, but I imagine the OP has his reasons. > > I'd bypass UDP altogether. > > But in terms of my problem > > ssh -o compression=yes > > Can we get my files over faster? > > This is plenty fast enough for our nightly > (Should the americans nuke us, we can get the > kayaking club up ok) transfer out of country. :) > > I have never worried of if before. > > But, efficiency for its own sake. > Way useless, but way cool. > > can I get my files out faster?
Usually I use my home router (which has an attached HDD) for downloading movies and stuff (big files) from the WAN... it has a 800Mhz mips cpu... anyway my experience with it is that: rsync tops at ~400Kbps apache+wget tops at ~1.1Mbps netcat tops at ~1.4Mbps -- Marc -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
