yes you are right - my mistake
The multitude of options is really confusing -- it's comforting to see I'm not the only one affected
And thanks again for the confirmation, going ahead with the testing.
And here are the results:
- Test command:
cd CHUNKED_ENCRYPTED_BOX_REMOTE_MOUNT_POINT/DIRECTORY_WITH_2000_FILES
time sh -c 'echo "=== `date` start"; for ix in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a b c d e f g h i j k; do \
echo -n "$ix "; touch xx$ix; \
done; echo "=== `date` creation done, sleeping until CR"; read discard
Performance:
-
On the remote mounted with `--vfs-cache-mode=off[1]: 1087 secs (as seen on rclone mount's log from the start of the creation of the first file, to the moment the last file is commited to the remote); ie ~54.4 seconds/file;
-
Ditto, with
--vfs-cache-mode=writes --vfs-cache-max-size 2g --transfers=16 --vfs-write-back=1
[2]: 108 secs (as seen on rclone mount's log from the start of the creation of the first file, to the moment the last file finishes being uploaded to the remote); ie 5.4 seconds/file;
To sum it up, the combo of cache-mode writes, 20 transfers, plus 1 second of writeback was 10 times(!) faster than with no cache.
Now I'm going to interrupt the currently running tar x
and restart it with -k
on top of a new mount with the faster parameters.
Many thanks to @kapitainsky for the great assist!
PS: Complete rclone mount
commands mentioned above
[1] rclone -vv mount CHUNKED_ENCRYPTED_BOX_REMOTE: CHUNKED_ENCRYPTED_BOX_REMOTE_MOUNT_POINT --buffer-size 512m --dir-cache-time=1h --max-read-ahead 256m --vfs-cache-mode off --rc --rc-addr 127.0.0.1:5573
[2] rclone -vv mount CHUNKED_ENCRYPTED_BOX_REMOTE: CHUNKED_ENCRYPTED_BOX_REMOTE_MOUNT_POINT --buffer-size 512m --dir-cache-time=1h --max-read-ahead 256m --cache-dir ALTERNATE_CACHE_DIR --vfs-cache-mode writes --vfs-cache-max-size 2g --transfers=16 --vfs-write-back=1 --rc --rc-addr 127.0.0.1:5573
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.