0

I've been looking into this problem, and it is common. But since there is a package for Mac with the same name, the solution for Mac users is hiding the solution for Linux users and our default sshfs.

This the best I got so far, from what actually works on Linux.

sshfs user@host:remoteDir localDir -o Ciphers=arcfour -oauto_cache,reconnect,no_readahead

note: this question was not appropriate for stackoverflow, dunno why: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/25365487/sshfs-too-slow-what-options-to-use-to-make-it-faster-not-for-mac-users

5
  • How for away (hops/geographically) is the remote host?
    – Daniel B
    Aug 21, 2014 at 18:36
  • This is a west-europe to ?-america thing. But I actually have an option to change it to europe to europe, that would be smart. You have any suggestions based on this?
    – gl00ten
    Aug 21, 2014 at 19:15
  • 1
    Well, yes. You could test it locally and see if it’s fast enough. If it isn’t, sshfs is not the solution you’re looking for.
    – Daniel B
    Aug 22, 2014 at 7:12
  • I was kinda looking for some comments on the sshfs parameters I used.
    – gl00ten
    Aug 27, 2014 at 15:21
  • You can’t hide network (and protocol!) latency. Especially with SFTP/SCP, which do not push state changes to clients. It’s simply a terribly inefficient protocol.
    – Daniel B
    Aug 27, 2014 at 16:33

2 Answers 2

1

My network drives are painfully slow at work, so I made a CRON job which executes rsync -triv --delete to periodically synchronize the files in the background. You should time the rsync job a few times to determine a suitable interval so that you don't end up with multiple rsyncs piling up trying to copy at the same time.

If you have to have up-to-the-second changes propagated, this won't work for you.

3
  • I thought about using rsync somehow, but it was kind of like this: As I'm working on a big eclipse remote project, make a partial local copy of the part I'm working on. Close remote project. Work on partial local project. Rsync when you are done. Open remote project to check it again. Is this what you had in mind?
    – gl00ten
    Aug 21, 2014 at 18:48
  • I would only do that if the project was so big that I couldn't make a local copy of the entire thing. You definately don't want to be calling --delete if you only have a partial copy, and if you don't call that, then if you ever need to delete a file, you'll have to delete files manually on the remote copy too. That's too manual for my tastes, which is why I keep everything locally and rely on rsync to not copy unchanged stuff back and forth. Aug 22, 2014 at 13:01
  • It is in fact a huge folder, and it's a live folder, as in, it is being run by the remote systme as I edit it (the whole reason I'm doing it like this). Having a remote project and a local clone of it on which you edit and then resync with the remote, is a weird solution, but I guess it can work.
    – gl00ten
    Aug 22, 2014 at 14:04
0

The most important option is compression, -C.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .