Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What is your favorite method of sending large files?

news.ycombinator.com

81–90 of 363 posts

Re: Ask HN: What is your favorite method of sending large files?

#81

S3. Sometimes I do that even when I'm transferring on my local network just because I know the flow so well. After all, my speed to the Internet is roughly the same as the speed on my LAN. They're both gigabit duplex.

You config IAM perms every time?

Re: Ask HN: What is your favorite method of sending large files?

#82
Apparently not explicitly mentioned: rsync over ssh.

Windows now comes with real sshd - Mac has it, and linux/bsd of course has it.

For small files (less than 10gb?) generally scp - but trying to get in the habit of using rsync. Generally scp isn't a very good idea.

For larger filesystems zfs send over ssh.

For streaming: dlna/upnp over zerotier vpn.

Shame Firefox send service imploded - for smaller files and where ssh isn't an option - it was a nice service. But a little too much hassle to self-host.

Re: Ask HN: What is your favorite method of sending large files?

#83
I run FileBrowser [1] to share media with friends. I would suggest trying IPFS if you don't want to forward a port from the internet. You'll get similar download performance to FileBrowser once your node integrates with the network (this takes 30 minutes or so). Check it out!

[1]: https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser

Re: Ask HN: What is your favorite method of sending large files?

#86
Bittorrent. No, really. Lots of nice behaviors when transferring large amounts of data between arbitrary endpoints.

Transferring the torrent metadata is pretty trivial and can be done via a wide range of methods, and having that flexibility can be nice.

Unlike HTTP, you get reasonable retry behavior on network hiccups. Also, more robust data integrity guarantees, though a manual hash test is probably a good idea either way.

At least among people I'm throwing TBs of data around with, torrent infra is common and it's nice to not have to deal with some special-purpose tool that, in practice, is probably a pain in the ass to get compatible versions deployed across a range of OSes. Basically every platform known to man can run a torrent client of some sort.

And obviously, no dependency on an intermediary. This is good if you're trying to avoid Google et al. That does, however, bring a potential con: if my side is fast and your side is slow, I'm seeing until you're done. If I'm uploading something to gdrive or whatever, I can disconnect one r the upload is done. If you control an intermediary like a seedbox, that's less of a problem.

In general, though, torrents are pretty great for this sort of thing. Just encrypt your stuff beforehand.

Re: Ask HN: What is your favorite method of sending large files?

#88
post #41

Private Nextcloud. Or some free tier OneDrive/alternative is enought for me. However no-one mentioned a super simple service: https://wetransfer.com/ - Simple as drag & drop, enter recipient address, SEND. Pretty simple if you want non techie to send you something.

I work with geneticists and they all seem to use wetransfer for big data files.

Re: Ask HN: What is your favorite method of sending large files?

#89
Since 5GB would take quite a long time to upload on DSL: almost universally dropbox, simply because it resumes + it's accessible to people with a url. If the recipient is ssh-friendly and there's a shared machine we can both access, rsync is quite a lot faster and more controllable and doesn't make my CPU angry for hours.

Otherwise I liked Firefox Send while it was running since I mostly trust them to not be full of intrusive nonsense.

Post reply on HN