Tom 'Needs A Hat' Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 06:59:37AM +0100, WipeOut wrote:
I have created a script that will backup some files from my web server
to my local server via the internet.. I will be using Rsync over SSH..
I am unsure of the best way to impliment compression since bothe Rsync
and SSH have the ability to compress data..
On a local link I turn compression off. The CPU effort and latency to
compress then uncompress does not justify the time saved in transfer
time.
Yes but my backup will be going via the internet so I would rather
sacrifice CPU cycles and save bandwidth..
Also most digital content (images, rpms) do not compress enough to
justify the cycles. Some increase in size....
Since this depends on your content and your local system capabilities
I can only advise you to list all the possible environment knobs in
your script and then benchmark by turning them on and off.
Yea, I can see thats what I will end up having to do, I was hoping
someone would have known the answer..
Of interest if compression proves to be an advantage for backups then
you should check into compression on the httpd server side. It is
possible to present compressed content to an aware client that is then
expanded locally by the browser.
Already being used on my web server.. :)
But the backups are not over http so I am investigating the compression..
