4 TB over my home network. 800GB download from a external server.
Linux
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
Largest one I ever did was around 4.something TB. New off-site backup server at a friends place. Took me 4 months due to data limits and an upload speed that maxed out at 3MB/s.
I've imaged an entire 128GB SSD to my NAS...
Manually transferred about 7TBs to my new Rpi4 powered NAS. It took a couple of days because I was lazy and transferred 15 GBs at a time which slowed down the speed for some reason. It could handle small sub 1 GB files in half a minute otherwise.
Could the slowdown be down to HDDs that cache on a section of - I think it's single layer? - and slowly rewrite that cache onto the denser (compound layer?) storage?
Around 15 TB migrating to a new NAS.
You should ping CERN or Fermilab about this. Or maybe the Event Horizon Telescope team but I think they used sneakernet to image the M87 black hole.
Anyway, my answer is probably just a SQL backup like everyone else.
I did 100TB, 100 streams of 1TB, all simultaneous with rsync
I synced to the BSV shitcoin which is 11+ terabytes. So large I had to turn on throwing away the rest of what I downloaded because it wouldn't fit on all of the storage media I own. I feel sorry for the people running an archive node.
When I was in highschool we toured the local EPA office. They had the most data I've ever seen accessible in person. Im going to guess how much.
It was a dome with a robot arm that spun around and grabbed tapes. It was 2000 so I'm guessing 100gb per tape. But my memory on the shape of the tapes isn't good.
Looks like tapes were four inches tall. Let's found up to six inches for housing and easier math. The dome was taller than me. Let's go with 14 shelves.
Let's guess a six foot shelf diameter. So, like 20 feet circumference. Tapes were maybe .8 inches a pop. With space between for robot fingers and stuff, let's guess 240 tapes per shelf.
That comes out to about 300 terabytes. Oh. That isn't that much these days. I mean, it's a lot. But these days you could easily get that in spinning disks. No robot arm seek time. But with modern hardware it'd be 60 petabytes.
I'm not sure how you'd transfer it these days. A truck, presumably. But you'd probably want to transfer a copy rather than disassemble it. That sounds slow too.
Multiple TB when setting up a new server to mirror an existing one. (Did an initial copy with both together in the same room, before moving the clone to a physically separate location. Doing that initial copy would saturate the network connection for a week or more otherwise)
My cousin once stuffed an ISO through my mail server in '98. His connection up in Bella Bella restricted non-batched comms back then, so he jammed it through the server as email to get on the batched quota.
It took the data and passed it along without error, albeit with some constipation!
Today I've migrated my data from my old zfs pool to a new bigger one, the rsync of 13.5TiB took roughly 18 hours. It's slow spinning disks storage so that's fine.
The second and third runs of the same rsync took like 5 seconds, blazing fast.
I routinely do 1-4TB images of SSDs before making major changes to the disk. Run fstrim on all partitions and pipe dd output through zstd before writing to disk and they shrink to actually used size or a bit smaller. Largest ever backup was probably ~20T cloned from one array to another over 40/56GbE, the deltas after that were tiny by comparison.
I mean dd claims they can handle a quettabyte but how can we but sure.
dd can’t really handle quettabytes! GNU has taken us all for fools! Alert the masses! Wake up sheeple!
80GB, it was 8 hours of (supposedly) 4k content in the MP4 format. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VF5JWdaJlvc Here's the link (hoping for the piped bot to appear).
As a single file? Likely 20GB iso.
As a collective job, 3TB of videos between hard drives for Jellyfin.
Why would dd have a limit on the amount of data it can copy, afaik dd doesn't check not does anything fancy, if it can copy one bit it can copy infinite.
Even if it did any sort of validation, if it can do anything larger than RAM it needs to be able to do it in chunks.
No, it can't copy infinite bits, because it has to store the current address somewhere. If they implement unbounded integers for this, they are still limited by your RAM, as that number can't infinitely grow without infinite memory.
~340GB, more than a million small files (~10KB or less each one). It took like one week to move because the files were stored in a hard drive and it was struggling to read that many files.
I'm currently in the process of transferring about 50 TB from one zpool to another (locally), so I can destroy and recreate it.
I've downloaded a few torrents that were around 5 TB each, they're PS4 and Xbox 360 game collections.
Local file transfer?
I cloned a 1TB+ system a couple of times.
As the Anaconda installer of Fedora Atomic is broken (yes, ironic) I have one system originally meant for tweaking as my "zygote" and just clone, resize, balance and rebase that for new systems.
Remote? 10GB MicroWin 11 LTSC IOT ISO, the least garbage that OS can get.
Also, some leaked stuff 50GB over Bittorrent