-
Hi Neil
- Im still not clear why S3 Adapter is not correct – it does satisfy all the requirements for an efficient transfer (large no of files, extremely fat rates of transfer 250-400Mbps etc.) What is the clear distinction that favors writing in parallel vs using S3 Adapter for the same millions of files scenario in the questions? If posted the same question to Amazon Q AI bot and it (and chatgpt) both of which gave this answer “Writing to a Snowball device using the S3 Adapter can potentially be faster than using the regular file interface: However, the actual performance difference between using the S3 Adapter versus the regular file interface can vary depending on factors such as the size and type of data being transferred, the network conditions, and the specific workload requirements.” -> without additional details in the question – I feel there’s no BLACK or WHITE difference in your explanation as to why you favor File interface in parallel vs S3 Adapter?
- The “100 GBPs” is in the explanation of the final incorrect answer – this is where I was looking to understand where you pulled this info from?
The option that says: The file interface of the Snowball Edge is limited by the network interface speed. Connect the device directly using a high-speed USB 3.0 interface instead to maximize the copying throughput is incorrect. Although some revisions of USB 3.0 or USB 3.1 can support up to 5 Gbps to 10 Gbps speeds, the network interface on the Snowball Edge supports up to 100 Gbps. You can maximize throughput by issuing multiple copy commands to the Snowball device.
