I agree with Scott, no need to use rsync - he should have used rclone instead! It can be easily installed in the package manager, and with 4 threads (or multiples of 4) it fully uses/saturates the 4 1GbE links.
Also a hint for anyone planning something similar: if you use Synologys SHR format (based on mdraid+btrfs) and your new destination supports or uses BTRFS too, you can just btrfs send your whole pool to the new NAS!
(Since its a single process it wont saturate any LAG though)
I tried that before and ran into issues due to the fact that synology's btrfs implementation has quite a few patches. I forgot exactly what issues I had, just ymmv.
The fact that synology's btrfs is incompatible with a normal linux distribution and that the official instructions from synology for reading it is to use an older kernel together with ubuntu 16.04 lts convinced me to switch away from synology.
Comments
I agree with Scott, no need to use rsync - he should have used rclone instead! It can be easily installed in the package manager, and with 4 threads (or multiples of 4) it fully uses/saturates the 4 1GbE links.
Also a hint for anyone planning something similar: if you use Synologys SHR format (based on mdraid+btrfs) and your new destination supports or uses BTRFS too, you can just btrfs send your whole pool to the new NAS!
(Since its a single process it wont saturate any LAG though)
I tried that before and ran into issues due to the fact that synology's btrfs implementation has quite a few patches. I forgot exactly what issues I had, just ymmv.
The fact that synology's btrfs is incompatible with a normal linux distribution and that the official instructions from synology for reading it is to use an older kernel together with ubuntu 16.04 lts convinced me to switch away from synology.
I believe that Ubiquiti advertises that they use zfs.