Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: Andrew DeFaria Subject: ftp way quicker than cp? Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 11:16:24 -0700 Lines: 28 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet AT sea DOT gmane DOT org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Ftp is orders of magnitude quicker than cp. Here's the situation. File to copy: 25 Meg. From location: Santa Clara, USA. To location: Shanghai, China Network connection: Not really sure but both Santa Clara and Shanghai are in the same NT domain. I tried the following: $ time ncftpput sons-cc Release 2.2.0.7.images.tar.gz 2.2.0.7.images.tar.gz: 25.99 MB 81.70 kB/s real 5m34.187s user 0m0.327s sys 0m1.124s $ time cp 2.2.0.7.images.tar.gz //sons-shanghai/users/ftp/release real 133m39.290s user 0m1.186s sys 0m7.406s Why such a huge difference! Had I thought that such a huge difference would have occurred I would have switched to ftp long ago! === Give me ambiguity or give me something else. -- 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/