|
Thanks, Larry
Interesting results - I've always liked the convenience of the SAVRST*
commands - I'm not aware of a single-command solution, especially for
library system objects - unless one counts QFileSvr.400 and the CPY CL
command.
Of course, with FTP and library system objects, one has to put them into
a SAVF first - which takes a little time, SAVRST* commands effectively
do that on your behalf.
Cheers in the New Year!
Vern
On 1/1/2016 11:22 PM, DrFranken wrote:
Vern,
Nope. That requires SNA is all set up and in this case, it's TCP, All
TCP and Nothing bu TCP. :-)
BUT Just for you I cranked up Extenders and gave that a spin.
FTP Still fastest as I expected.
That said, SAVRST did better than I expected. With the large file
about 35% longer than FTP. With the small file it was terrible almost
7 times longer likely due to the overhead of starting communications
and starting the receiving job on the target system. That overhead is
the same amount of time with a little object or a large object.
As one further test I also saved the large object into a save file
with no compression so it's almost exactly the same size. I then used
SAVRSTOBJ to move that file and it was actually 5 seconds(5%) faster
than SAVRST of the IFS file.
- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis
www.Frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com - Personal Development IBM i timeshare service.
www.iInTheCloud.com - Commercial IBM i Cloud Hosting.
On 1/1/2016 9:26 PM, Vernon Hamberg wrote:
Larry
Did you have a shot at using SAVRSTOBJ or SAVRSTLIB or SAVRST?
Vern
On 1/1/2016 4:06 PM, DrFranken wrote:
Here you are not using NFS you are using the Netserver (/QNTC).
I did some testing at one point between two IBM i 7.1 systems. They
are local so GbE between them. The files moved were a 300MB IFS file
and a 4GB IFS File.
In order of fastest to slowest:
FTP Basline (1.0)
CPY QFileSvr.400 17% Slower (*1) (*3)
CPY over NFS 30% Slower
scp 100% Slower (*2)
cp over QNTC 300% Slower
CPY over QNTC 300% Slower
cp QFileSvr.400 325% Slower
cp with NFS 550% Slower
(*1) = each type is this percentage additional time than the baseline.
(*2) = scp was not reliable with the 4G File. Fails half the time.
(*3) = QFileSvr.400 actually won the small file by 0.3 second.
cp is the cp command in QP2TERM
CPY is the IBM i CPY command
Observations:
1) I did not expect QFileSvr.400 to be this good. It surprised me.
However look at the massive difference when using that file system
with QP2TERM! Over 3 times longer!
2) Also note how slow cp is over NFS while NFS itself was close the
performance of QFileSvr.400
3) These were not Save Files, I believe they transfer more slowly when
the target is in /QSYS.LIB
4) Your Mileage May Vary!!!
- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis
www.Frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com - Personal Development IBM i timeshare service.
www.iInTheCloud.com - Commercial IBM i Cloud Hosting.
On 12/31/2015 7:47 PM, tim wrote:
im using nfs. here is example of cp command syntax. i am copying
savf to
another iseries.
STRQSH CMD('cp /qsys.lib/qgpl.lib/ftplib.file
/qntc/10.0.0.93/root/iseriesbackup/QS36F')
On 12/31/2015 6:43 PM, Vernon Hamberg wrote:
What is the context? I know of cp as a QShell or PASE command and not
aware of it being used between servers - what are you using to make
the servers visible to each other? NFS? QFileSvr.400?
Vern
On 12/31/2015 4:54 PM, tim wrote:
cp or ftp which is faster to transfer files between iseries?
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.