enable USB 3.0 temporarily to transfer data?

[odoyle]

Sorry if this information is somewhere, but I couldn't find it.
I followed some guides to try to enable USB 3.0 support, but my system won't boot unless xhci_load is set to "NO", so I don't have USB 3.0 support.
Is there a way, to temporarily enable it on a running system (without reboot) in order to transfer data from USB 3.0 drives directly connected to the system?

 

[cyberjock]

If you are setting xhci_load=YES and then your system won't boot then you are the exact reason why it's defaulted to NO.

The problem is tons of USB3 hardware isn't supported and much of it crashes the system on bootup, so we had to disable USB3 to prevent 20% of our userbase from being stuck on 8.3.2 for the forseeable future.

Enabling USB3 is at your own risk and reward. I don't recommend people enable it, and I don't enable it myself despite knowing that my hardware does indeed work fine.

My advice would be to just copy the stuff over your LAN and connect the disks to your desktop. Yes, it sucks because it's slow. But it's also a one-time thing, so it's not the end of the world. ;)

 

[odoyle]

Ok, thanks for the clarification - I couldn't find a clear recent answer about this and wasn't sure if things have changed recently.

 

[9C1 Newbee]

My advice would be to just copy the stuff over your LAN and connect the disks to your desktop. Yes, it sucks because it's slow. But it's also a one-time thing, so it's not the end of the world. ;)

Transferred about 9TB using this exact method about a week ago. If you are on a windows machine, I recommend a program such as TeraCopy that will perform a CRC to verify the data. Took me about 3 days over gig Ethernet.

 

[odoyle]

My plan was to use rsync, and I think that does some checksum stuff.. maybe someone can confirm.

 

[Knowltey]

My plan was to use rsync, and I think that does some checksum stuff.. maybe someone can confirm.

Yes rsync does checksums and stuff, but it is also MUCH slower.

You're also going to be spending a lot of the rsync time just waking for the NAS to read through it's entire pool just to verify that the data in question isn't already there before even beginning the transfer.

 

[odoyle]

Slower than what? It seems to be pretty fast to me..

 

[Knowltey]

Slower than simple transferring.

 

[cyberjock]

rsync typically maxes out at 40MB/sec... max...

I can do either copy over smb shares or even zfs replication at near Gb saturation. And on 10Gb the speeds are obviously even higher.. the bottleneck is my pool at 500MB/sec or so.

So no, 500MB/sec or 40MB/sec... no argument what is faster. ;)