Re: LDM performance vs scp?

Robert Mullenax wrote:
> I do a lot of ftp and LDM, but I have never benchmarked them. I will
> say that in my mind if all you are doing is sending files from one machine
> to another and not doing anything on the receiving end the maybe
> LDM is not the best thing. It's strength in my mind is pqact..the ability
> to send data to another machine and be able to kick off many different
> processes on the receiving end as the data comes in.
>

Actually, I do want to use this feature of pqact, but I don't think I can afford the overhead of using LDM.

David Wojtowicz wrote:
At 4:19 PM -0600 3/29/2002, Gerry Creager N5JXS wrote:

as an additional, but not objectively confirmed datapoint, scp and sftp
perform faster for me than ftp between identical machines.


scp/sftp typically compress the data before encrypting it though the
default setting varies by platform/version. Over a slow connection
but using fast machines this can greatly increase transfer rates if
your data is compressible by a large amount.  If the machine is slow
and the network fast, then the overhead of the compression can
actually slow things down.  compression can be enabled/disabled by
command line options.


I forgot to mention in my original post that the data was already compressed (gzipped tar file).

--
Joe VanAndel    
National Center for Atmospheric Research
http://www.atd.ucar.edu/~vanandel/
Internet: vanandel@xxxxxxxx