Re: Data Pump slower than equivalent Export ?!?

Hi,

scp better thant ftp ...

yes i definetly agree but:

Take a look at rsync which is included in modern [Li/U]nixes. It has this compression feature and -lots- more.

for example:

bandwithlimit, checksum, dry-run, delete not existing on target, different comression modes,
use your preferred shell ssh for example to go through firewalls,

yes i know scp has also some of this but you may take a look,

kind regards,

Toni

In article <pan.2005.09.17.02.07.26.448073_at_sbcglobal.net>, Mladen Gogala <gogala_at_sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 20:18:05 +0200, Ronald Rood wrote:
>
> > The ftp session alone of the conventional expdat.dmp (49GB) of
> > the same database took 1 hour and 20 minutes...
>
> You should have used scp with "-C" argument. It turns the compression on
> and copies much faster then ftp ever could. If you are enamored by the
> ftp's put/get/mput/mget/prompt command set, you can use sftp. In my
> opinion, ftp and kermit commands are from the same period and both suck.
> I use scp whenever I can.
> As for "data pump" utilities, their main advantage comes from the fact
> that they're able to use parallelism. Expdp can, in contrast to exp, use
> parallel query, while impdp can do parallel DML. In order to see an
> improvement, one needs to use a database which can utilize parallelism.
Received on Wed Sep 21 2005 - 05:34:50 CDT