Paul, Thanks for your response.
> > results. Why the time of transferring the file to 2N nodes is shorter than > > twice of the time of transferring the same file to N nodes? Does it make > > If the network is not the bottleneck, then cpu or the disks are. The network is 100Mbps LAN. > If (similar) tasks are run in parallel, then the data of the files being > handled may still be in the buffer cache so that it doesn't need to get > read in from disk again. This will save time... I agree with you that caching effect might be the cause. The buffer cache you mentioned refers to the cache on the data source, right? Xuehai -- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
