![]() ![]() It might even be that the transfer is more efficient, due to lower latency caused by various network appliances in between you and the server.Īs mentioned in that link by offloading the copy to the server itself you almost entirely remove your local machine from the equation:Ī source file and a destination file can be on the same volume, two different volumes hosted by the same machine, a local volume and a remote volume through Server Message Block (SMB2 or SMB3), or two volumes on two different machines through SMB2 or SMB3 It might cause a higher instant CPU or network load, but the transfer can happen faster. If you have a 10mbps connection to both servers, but they have 10gbps local connections, then copying locally will be incredibly slow by comparison. For two servers in the same datacenter it can be a lot faster, as the copy can happen at the local datacenter link speed. It is the same amount being downloaded from one server and the same amount being uploaded to another, but the focus point of that load is shifted.īy offloading the copy to the server it becomes the server itself that does the copy. In theory the load on the remote server will (by aggregate) be the same.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |