#Emcopy windows 10#
#Emcopy windows#

Personally, I swear by Directory Opus, by GPsoftware.

mount it on source host (ie: mount x.x.x.Large file transfers are always a challenge.

mount the NTFS filesystem (ie: in /mnt/localdir).

Transfer files with the NFS protocol (rather than SMB). On the source host, try to boot with a linux live cd/usb and to Note: you should consider this as a test and/or a temporary solution only, I do not suggest to permanently run with these settings off On the destination host, create a dedicated dataset with disabled sync, checksum and compression (ie: zfs set sync=disabled, etc). That said, I do not think that the source NVMe drive is the bottleneck after all, you are reading quite large files, with a considerable amount or sequential reads.Дue to the high number of files involved, I lean more towards inefficiencies in NTFS and/or the SMB protocol itself. Without extensive profiling on both source and destination, it is difficult to give a definitive answer. Or try to rule out some components by attaching devices directly with no extra switch in between or whatever you can remove from the scenario for testing. If just the reversal leads to much better speeds, then perhaps there is one component that limits only when reading and not when writing, or vice versa.

You could reverse the transfer direction and copy some of the small files back onto the workstations. For example, you can transfer a big file across and see if this transfer suffers the same limitations. If none of this helps you because you were able to exclude both the drives on the source and the destination sides as being the root cause for the issue, then I suggest you start with basic troubleshooting steps. If it turns out that the drives on the source side are not busy at all, you might want to check the destination side and see how the drives are doing there (you can use the tool iostat for that).

#Emcopy windows#

Disclaimer: I do not know how reliable the busy percentages of the windows task manager are, especially not for external drives. On the other hand, if it is idling, then it is not limiting. If the drive(s) in question sit at 100% or at anything above 80%, then they are likely limiting the speeds. The task manager will give you a percentage of how busy the drives are.

#Emcopy windows 10#

To prove or invalidate my assumption, you can use the Windows 10 task manager or the performance monitor. Internal NVMe M2 drives (or other faster PCI-e based ones) might resolve the problem. Depending on what technology is used, USB3.0, 3.1, 3.2 or Thunderbolt, this connection might cause slowdowns as well. There are SSDs such as Intel Optane SSDs that can deliver random read speeds in the ballpark of around 500MB/s.ДЇurthermore you state that you connect the drives via USB-C. Reviews of SSDs will often include random read speed results which is where I got that range from. Random read rates for common consumer/prosumer NVMe M2 SSDs range from 70MB/s to 110MB/s, that is within your rate of 600Mbps. That is true for sequential reads for big files, but in your situation you will have random reads instead. The fast NVMe M2s (that you are most likely using, I think) are advertised with up to multiple GB/s r/w speeds. The root cause for the slow transfer rate is, possibly, the fact that the workstation M2 drives need to do a lot of random reads. It also becomes unresponsive to browse the shares on the workstations during these transfers. I want it to at least stay stable at 1.8Gbps instead of constantly dropping. EMCopy hasn't faired much better, and freefilesync wants to die after about 3 hours. This happens whether or not I'm using /MT:10 of /MT:1 on robocopy. Then as time elapses and the copy gets deeper and deeper into those files that speed drops to about 600Mbps. I get about 1.8Gbps transferring them over.

When I use robocopy to copy the files over. 8 Simultaneous transfers, across 8 workstations. So I have these RAID 0 drives with about 4TB of files each, and each file is 35MB.

External RAID 0 (3 or 4 disk) drives are connected via USB-C.

during transfers CPU usage is at about 50%.

Similiar config can be made on using the SUPERSTORAGE SERVERД¦048R-E1CR72L as a base and then add on expansion chassis.

3x LSI 3008 SAS 3.0 12Gb/s Host Bus Adpaters.

400TB of storage RAID Z1 using 4TB drives for more iops.

connection SMB Share with SMB 3.1 enabled.

I am currently running FreeNAS and using SMB 3 on windows machines to copy folders with 80000+ files that are all about 35MB each.