Subject: Re: ftp way quicker than cp?
From: Brian Dessent <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 14:22:30 -0700

Andrew DeFaria wrote:

> I was aware that there is SMB overhead - just didn't think it would be
> that great!

It's not necessarily overhead as in "extra data" but also round trip
delay times.  SMB was designed for use with a low-latency local network
connection, in contrast to FTP which was designed to just stream raw
data over a TCP connection.  In other words there's a bunch of message
passing and other "overhead" that takes TIME in addition to bandwith
with SMB.

> > IOW, this is not really Cygwin-related.
> 
> This is true if such large overhead is only attributable to SMB.

I think you'll find that the Cygwin "cp" command takes about the same
time as "copy" from a regular command prompt, which should also be
comparable to Explorer's copy function.

Brian

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/