Is there a way to efficiently move files from a samba share to another, when they are on the same disk ?

Oh - I forgot to mention - when I use the MV command, I use it via SSH, connected directly to the server, without using samba.

mv - command move files from one location to another.
cp - command copy files from one location to another.
Possibly mv will be faster than cp

Opss,i forgot too,connect to server via SSH and replace MV command with CP command.

Ivaylo,

The mv command is fast - it just moves the file from one directory to another.

My problem, is when I use Nautilus to move the files, from one share to another, via samba. It can take about 40~30 minutes to move a single 1400MB file, while on the command line via ssh, it does it on seconds.

As I said earlier, I think Nautilus download the file, and then re-uploads it to the server, with is an extremely slow process....

Probably you are right - Nautilus download the file, and then re-uploads it to the server.
If i understand you right,you are mount two different samba devices on your system,i will call they "Public" and "Private".
In this case when you copy file from "Public" to "Private" via your system,it is normal this file to travel: Public -> Your System -> Private

Ivaylo,

Yeah, that's it .... I know it is "normal" ... but, isn't there a way to improve this ? It HAS to be on that slow way ?

I'm not sure,but i think that no way to improve this kind of transfer.
Many factors influence on the transfer,like how many users are connected to your network,throughput,network performance,in your case samba server etc.,some of them you can improve.

Sure ... But I was wondering if it were possible to have samba to move the files in a matter of seconds, just as the mv command does .... 30 to 40 minutes is way toooo much time!

Ssh is the best way to send command to copy or move a file on a remote machine.
You can use ssh to send remote copy command, example:
ssh your_user@your_server_or_ip_name 'mv /home/user/incoming/filename /home/user/media/filename'

HTH

Elart, that's what I've been doing ... But the problem is that it's boring to have to open up a terminal, then typing the ssh command, then typing the password, and finally issuing the mv command, and exiting.

It would be much better if I could obtain the same performance that i have using ssh with move command, but using samba. It's really frustrating to have such a poor performance when managing my shares

ops, reopening

Viana, searching on the Net i found a solution isn't via samba but it is a good solution to do what are you looking for, please visit:
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/ssh_beyond_the_command_line?page=0%2C2

HTH

Wladston try this: Open Places -> Connect to server -> Chose "SSH" mode and add information in required field.
Now you can browse in your samba server via SSH,without to need every time to connect samba via terminal.This is my prefer way to connect in my samba servers.

Ivaylo,

Well, that would be a good solution, but the problem is that it doesn't create a "vitual drive" as I was expecting.

When I log in, and hit the "up" button, instead of going back to the shares, it lists the root of my server ...

also, when trying to open/save to the share from others applications (i tried to open a text file with gedit) it hanged ...

It could be a wonderfull solution, if it were better implemented ...

The core of the problem is that the client you are using doesn't have any way to determine that the two shares are anything to do with one another. In fact, it probably takes the same approach for everything (read to local store, write from local store), whether the files are on ftp, WebDAV, nfs, samba or physical, local drives on your computer.

There's nothing the server can do to help in that situation. You need a different client... If your remote server had server side tools for managing files, that would immediately solve the problem. Installing one of the many web-based management systems might be a good move, if you can find one with decent file handling (i.e. "pick these files up, move them there"). If you can't using some server-side scripting might fix things up.

Peter,

Hum, thanks a lot for the answer! So it turns out that the real flaw is somewhere on nautilus or samba-client. Do you think we should file a bug ? If yes, can you help writing it ?

The idea of the web-based management is awsome, it would even allow me to manage my files when I'm not in home. But I don't know any GUI web based file manager that I can install ... Have you seen any ?

@elart.it,

Looks like it works greatly on windows, but on nautilus, as I said, it's not seen as a share, or as a drive but as a special "location" ... the share is more simple and intive for me (I can go "up" and get back to the list of shares, I can open and save files to it, etc.)

No, it's not a bug. It's the design of the clients not to depend on the server implementation, other than "READ DATA" and "WRITE DATA" (and possibly "RENAME FROM" and "RENAME TO"). There is no trivial way to fix the client so it can know that two shares are actually on the same disk on the same server. You're into writing a whole new client-server file system protocol. And the world really doesn't need another.

Most web hosting sites I've seen provide some form of web-based management UI with a file manager. The most common one is cPanel, I should think. Do a google on "web control panel". You'll have to have a web server running, too, of course.

Peter,

Ahn, so it's a feature that isn't implementable on samba... ;-(

cPanel would be an overkill for me .... My server just servers me, and all I want is a way to efficiently move my files from one share to another, when needed... searching for web control panel didn't help much, but searching for web file manager did help, althought I couldn't find any application that I felt i was safe to install .. let's home ubuntu home server edition ships soon :)

I'm closing because the reason for the ticket was solved - the only way to move the files is either via ssh or via a web manager application.