Ranter
Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
Comments
-
lotd79228yFor that size using something like rsync could probably help a good deal.
Additionally, consider splitting backups into archive fragments (Tar balls ;)), if you aren't already :) -
lotd79228y@620hun its designed for file transfer and works great over ssh, honestly I don't know the details of how it works under the hood but have had good results, in particular over ssh..
This post is a pretty good read on the topic :)
http://moo.nac.uci.edu/~hjm/... -
Dunno if btsync would help here but I always get great speeds. Around 11MB/s over local network and usb. Would probably get more but I only have 100Mb network switch :p
-
here comes my ssd-obsessed friend saying "SEE?! I told you SSD is so much better than HDD and now you're paying for not listening to me!!"
fyi, I do actually have an ssd-obsessed friend, although he's not crazy xD -
darkness7348yWell at least it isn't the Windows XP days when it'd take 325 days or even 1019 years to copy.
-
Numinex10868y@Disreality I've actually got an sshd which is a hybrid with, uh i think it was 8 GB of ssd space and the rest is HDD. Or something like that. Still took years though since the sheer amount of really really small files crashed my computer when I ran out of ram.
When you're copying over 100GB. Ugh, it's gonna take forever.
Please kill me.
undefined