Transfer files between two remote SSH servers
Is there an easy way to transfer files between two SSH/SFTP servers? The perfect solution would be FileZilla, but it only lets you create a connection between local and remote, but not between remote and remote.
Theoretically I could open two Nautilus windows and connect to some ssh://server1/path/to/folder
and ssh://server2/path/to/folder
and then just pull the files from one to the other side. My experience is that this is very unstable. Transmitting files in size sum of i.e. 10MB is no problem, but transferring i.e. 10GB often resulted in Nautilus hanging itself up and remaining there in need of ps -e | grep nautilus
-> kill -9 <pid>
. I also tested the same thing with Nemo and Caja. While Nemo tends to be more stable than the two others, it still is not perfect and also breaks from time to time. FileZilla is extremely stable, never really got it to break, but it is not very flexible due to the mentioned fact that it can only connect to a single SSH server.
Of course I could also mount a folder with sshfs
, but this is kind of an inconvenient solution. Too much pre-work to do to get a simple transfer running.
Is there any app that can handle transfers between two SSH servers without breaking? Perfect would be something like FileZilla, that picks up the job again if the connection got interrupted.
ssh nautilus transfer nemo caja
add a comment |
Is there an easy way to transfer files between two SSH/SFTP servers? The perfect solution would be FileZilla, but it only lets you create a connection between local and remote, but not between remote and remote.
Theoretically I could open two Nautilus windows and connect to some ssh://server1/path/to/folder
and ssh://server2/path/to/folder
and then just pull the files from one to the other side. My experience is that this is very unstable. Transmitting files in size sum of i.e. 10MB is no problem, but transferring i.e. 10GB often resulted in Nautilus hanging itself up and remaining there in need of ps -e | grep nautilus
-> kill -9 <pid>
. I also tested the same thing with Nemo and Caja. While Nemo tends to be more stable than the two others, it still is not perfect and also breaks from time to time. FileZilla is extremely stable, never really got it to break, but it is not very flexible due to the mentioned fact that it can only connect to a single SSH server.
Of course I could also mount a folder with sshfs
, but this is kind of an inconvenient solution. Too much pre-work to do to get a simple transfer running.
Is there any app that can handle transfers between two SSH servers without breaking? Perfect would be something like FileZilla, that picks up the job again if the connection got interrupted.
ssh nautilus transfer nemo caja
2
I suspect there's a perfectly good reason whyssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
isn't an answer but the question doesn't exclude it.
– Joshua
9 hours ago
@Joshua - I suspect that the questioner hasn't considered it - you should submit that as an answer.
– Stobor
3 hours ago
@Stobor: Done..
– Joshua
29 mins ago
add a comment |
Is there an easy way to transfer files between two SSH/SFTP servers? The perfect solution would be FileZilla, but it only lets you create a connection between local and remote, but not between remote and remote.
Theoretically I could open two Nautilus windows and connect to some ssh://server1/path/to/folder
and ssh://server2/path/to/folder
and then just pull the files from one to the other side. My experience is that this is very unstable. Transmitting files in size sum of i.e. 10MB is no problem, but transferring i.e. 10GB often resulted in Nautilus hanging itself up and remaining there in need of ps -e | grep nautilus
-> kill -9 <pid>
. I also tested the same thing with Nemo and Caja. While Nemo tends to be more stable than the two others, it still is not perfect and also breaks from time to time. FileZilla is extremely stable, never really got it to break, but it is not very flexible due to the mentioned fact that it can only connect to a single SSH server.
Of course I could also mount a folder with sshfs
, but this is kind of an inconvenient solution. Too much pre-work to do to get a simple transfer running.
Is there any app that can handle transfers between two SSH servers without breaking? Perfect would be something like FileZilla, that picks up the job again if the connection got interrupted.
ssh nautilus transfer nemo caja
Is there an easy way to transfer files between two SSH/SFTP servers? The perfect solution would be FileZilla, but it only lets you create a connection between local and remote, but not between remote and remote.
Theoretically I could open two Nautilus windows and connect to some ssh://server1/path/to/folder
and ssh://server2/path/to/folder
and then just pull the files from one to the other side. My experience is that this is very unstable. Transmitting files in size sum of i.e. 10MB is no problem, but transferring i.e. 10GB often resulted in Nautilus hanging itself up and remaining there in need of ps -e | grep nautilus
-> kill -9 <pid>
. I also tested the same thing with Nemo and Caja. While Nemo tends to be more stable than the two others, it still is not perfect and also breaks from time to time. FileZilla is extremely stable, never really got it to break, but it is not very flexible due to the mentioned fact that it can only connect to a single SSH server.
Of course I could also mount a folder with sshfs
, but this is kind of an inconvenient solution. Too much pre-work to do to get a simple transfer running.
Is there any app that can handle transfers between two SSH servers without breaking? Perfect would be something like FileZilla, that picks up the job again if the connection got interrupted.
ssh nautilus transfer nemo caja
ssh nautilus transfer nemo caja
edited 1 hour ago
Solomon Ucko
1034
1034
asked 11 hours ago
SocratesSocrates
7081127
7081127
2
I suspect there's a perfectly good reason whyssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
isn't an answer but the question doesn't exclude it.
– Joshua
9 hours ago
@Joshua - I suspect that the questioner hasn't considered it - you should submit that as an answer.
– Stobor
3 hours ago
@Stobor: Done..
– Joshua
29 mins ago
add a comment |
2
I suspect there's a perfectly good reason whyssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
isn't an answer but the question doesn't exclude it.
– Joshua
9 hours ago
@Joshua - I suspect that the questioner hasn't considered it - you should submit that as an answer.
– Stobor
3 hours ago
@Stobor: Done..
– Joshua
29 mins ago
2
2
I suspect there's a perfectly good reason why
ssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
isn't an answer but the question doesn't exclude it.– Joshua
9 hours ago
I suspect there's a perfectly good reason why
ssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
isn't an answer but the question doesn't exclude it.– Joshua
9 hours ago
@Joshua - I suspect that the questioner hasn't considered it - you should submit that as an answer.
– Stobor
3 hours ago
@Joshua - I suspect that the questioner hasn't considered it - you should submit that as an answer.
– Stobor
3 hours ago
@Stobor: Done..
– Joshua
29 mins ago
@Stobor: Done..
– Joshua
29 mins ago
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
If you are on an Ubuntu version that is still supported, then
your scp
command will provide the -3
switch which enables
copying files from remote1 to remote2 via localhost:
me@local:~> scp -3 user1@remote1:/path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
You can also omit the -3
switch, but then you will need the
public key (id_rsa.pub
) of user1@remote1
in the
file authorized_keys
of user2@remote2
:
me@local:~> scp user1@remote1:/path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
scp
then under the hood does a ssh user1@remote1
first and from there
scp /path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
. That's why the credential must be
distributed different from the -3
solution.
That's just beautiful. ssh is the Swiss army knife of software. Thanks, I learned something.
– Organic Marble
9 hours ago
Note that this approach, like the nautilus approach described in the question, will transfer the file first to the local machine, then up to the second server. This will cause significant slowdown when the two remote servers have a faster link between them than the local machine does to either. (For example, when the remote servers are in datacentres and the local machine has a DSL connection.)
– Stobor
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Perhaps you could use one of several GUI front-ends to rsync:
Is there any GUI application for command rsync?
Or perhaps you could use rsync directly from the command line to connect to both remote servers:
"How to rsync files between two remotes"
I often log in to one server with ssh, then from that server's command line use rsync to push or pull files to the other remote server -- that's generally much quicker than trying to transfer the files through some 3rd computer.
The rsync is smart enough to do some work, then if anything goes wrong and interrupts the process, it can later resume right where it left off.
add a comment |
There's probably something I'm missing, but can't you SSH into one and connect to the other from it? Or do you want to avoid transferring one's credentials to the other? Or can they not access each other?
New contributor
add a comment |
In most cases, two ssh servers can reach each other (or at least one can reach the other), and again in most cases the workstation's internet is far worse than either of the servers.
If so, ordering one server to transfer to the other one is the way to go.
ssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
Check nohup.out
on server1 for errors.
add a comment |
You need to use SCP protocol.
scp file you want to transfer login@address_of_second_server:/path_where_you_want_to_save
New contributor
OP wants to copy files between two remote computers, not from local computer to remote computer. He also seems to be looking for a GUI solution.
– user68186
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1116153%2ftransfer-files-between-two-remote-ssh-servers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If you are on an Ubuntu version that is still supported, then
your scp
command will provide the -3
switch which enables
copying files from remote1 to remote2 via localhost:
me@local:~> scp -3 user1@remote1:/path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
You can also omit the -3
switch, but then you will need the
public key (id_rsa.pub
) of user1@remote1
in the
file authorized_keys
of user2@remote2
:
me@local:~> scp user1@remote1:/path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
scp
then under the hood does a ssh user1@remote1
first and from there
scp /path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
. That's why the credential must be
distributed different from the -3
solution.
That's just beautiful. ssh is the Swiss army knife of software. Thanks, I learned something.
– Organic Marble
9 hours ago
Note that this approach, like the nautilus approach described in the question, will transfer the file first to the local machine, then up to the second server. This will cause significant slowdown when the two remote servers have a faster link between them than the local machine does to either. (For example, when the remote servers are in datacentres and the local machine has a DSL connection.)
– Stobor
3 hours ago
add a comment |
If you are on an Ubuntu version that is still supported, then
your scp
command will provide the -3
switch which enables
copying files from remote1 to remote2 via localhost:
me@local:~> scp -3 user1@remote1:/path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
You can also omit the -3
switch, but then you will need the
public key (id_rsa.pub
) of user1@remote1
in the
file authorized_keys
of user2@remote2
:
me@local:~> scp user1@remote1:/path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
scp
then under the hood does a ssh user1@remote1
first and from there
scp /path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
. That's why the credential must be
distributed different from the -3
solution.
That's just beautiful. ssh is the Swiss army knife of software. Thanks, I learned something.
– Organic Marble
9 hours ago
Note that this approach, like the nautilus approach described in the question, will transfer the file first to the local machine, then up to the second server. This will cause significant slowdown when the two remote servers have a faster link between them than the local machine does to either. (For example, when the remote servers are in datacentres and the local machine has a DSL connection.)
– Stobor
3 hours ago
add a comment |
If you are on an Ubuntu version that is still supported, then
your scp
command will provide the -3
switch which enables
copying files from remote1 to remote2 via localhost:
me@local:~> scp -3 user1@remote1:/path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
You can also omit the -3
switch, but then you will need the
public key (id_rsa.pub
) of user1@remote1
in the
file authorized_keys
of user2@remote2
:
me@local:~> scp user1@remote1:/path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
scp
then under the hood does a ssh user1@remote1
first and from there
scp /path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
. That's why the credential must be
distributed different from the -3
solution.
If you are on an Ubuntu version that is still supported, then
your scp
command will provide the -3
switch which enables
copying files from remote1 to remote2 via localhost:
me@local:~> scp -3 user1@remote1:/path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
You can also omit the -3
switch, but then you will need the
public key (id_rsa.pub
) of user1@remote1
in the
file authorized_keys
of user2@remote2
:
me@local:~> scp user1@remote1:/path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
scp
then under the hood does a ssh user1@remote1
first and from there
scp /path/to/file1 user2@remote2:/path/to/file2
. That's why the credential must be
distributed different from the -3
solution.
edited 10 hours ago
answered 11 hours ago
PerlDuckPerlDuck
6,37711335
6,37711335
That's just beautiful. ssh is the Swiss army knife of software. Thanks, I learned something.
– Organic Marble
9 hours ago
Note that this approach, like the nautilus approach described in the question, will transfer the file first to the local machine, then up to the second server. This will cause significant slowdown when the two remote servers have a faster link between them than the local machine does to either. (For example, when the remote servers are in datacentres and the local machine has a DSL connection.)
– Stobor
3 hours ago
add a comment |
That's just beautiful. ssh is the Swiss army knife of software. Thanks, I learned something.
– Organic Marble
9 hours ago
Note that this approach, like the nautilus approach described in the question, will transfer the file first to the local machine, then up to the second server. This will cause significant slowdown when the two remote servers have a faster link between them than the local machine does to either. (For example, when the remote servers are in datacentres and the local machine has a DSL connection.)
– Stobor
3 hours ago
That's just beautiful. ssh is the Swiss army knife of software. Thanks, I learned something.
– Organic Marble
9 hours ago
That's just beautiful. ssh is the Swiss army knife of software. Thanks, I learned something.
– Organic Marble
9 hours ago
Note that this approach, like the nautilus approach described in the question, will transfer the file first to the local machine, then up to the second server. This will cause significant slowdown when the two remote servers have a faster link between them than the local machine does to either. (For example, when the remote servers are in datacentres and the local machine has a DSL connection.)
– Stobor
3 hours ago
Note that this approach, like the nautilus approach described in the question, will transfer the file first to the local machine, then up to the second server. This will cause significant slowdown when the two remote servers have a faster link between them than the local machine does to either. (For example, when the remote servers are in datacentres and the local machine has a DSL connection.)
– Stobor
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Perhaps you could use one of several GUI front-ends to rsync:
Is there any GUI application for command rsync?
Or perhaps you could use rsync directly from the command line to connect to both remote servers:
"How to rsync files between two remotes"
I often log in to one server with ssh, then from that server's command line use rsync to push or pull files to the other remote server -- that's generally much quicker than trying to transfer the files through some 3rd computer.
The rsync is smart enough to do some work, then if anything goes wrong and interrupts the process, it can later resume right where it left off.
add a comment |
Perhaps you could use one of several GUI front-ends to rsync:
Is there any GUI application for command rsync?
Or perhaps you could use rsync directly from the command line to connect to both remote servers:
"How to rsync files between two remotes"
I often log in to one server with ssh, then from that server's command line use rsync to push or pull files to the other remote server -- that's generally much quicker than trying to transfer the files through some 3rd computer.
The rsync is smart enough to do some work, then if anything goes wrong and interrupts the process, it can later resume right where it left off.
add a comment |
Perhaps you could use one of several GUI front-ends to rsync:
Is there any GUI application for command rsync?
Or perhaps you could use rsync directly from the command line to connect to both remote servers:
"How to rsync files between two remotes"
I often log in to one server with ssh, then from that server's command line use rsync to push or pull files to the other remote server -- that's generally much quicker than trying to transfer the files through some 3rd computer.
The rsync is smart enough to do some work, then if anything goes wrong and interrupts the process, it can later resume right where it left off.
Perhaps you could use one of several GUI front-ends to rsync:
Is there any GUI application for command rsync?
Or perhaps you could use rsync directly from the command line to connect to both remote servers:
"How to rsync files between two remotes"
I often log in to one server with ssh, then from that server's command line use rsync to push or pull files to the other remote server -- that's generally much quicker than trying to transfer the files through some 3rd computer.
The rsync is smart enough to do some work, then if anything goes wrong and interrupts the process, it can later resume right where it left off.
answered 8 hours ago
David CaryDavid Cary
4453617
4453617
add a comment |
add a comment |
There's probably something I'm missing, but can't you SSH into one and connect to the other from it? Or do you want to avoid transferring one's credentials to the other? Or can they not access each other?
New contributor
add a comment |
There's probably something I'm missing, but can't you SSH into one and connect to the other from it? Or do you want to avoid transferring one's credentials to the other? Or can they not access each other?
New contributor
add a comment |
There's probably something I'm missing, but can't you SSH into one and connect to the other from it? Or do you want to avoid transferring one's credentials to the other? Or can they not access each other?
New contributor
There's probably something I'm missing, but can't you SSH into one and connect to the other from it? Or do you want to avoid transferring one's credentials to the other? Or can they not access each other?
New contributor
New contributor
answered 3 hours ago
Solomon UckoSolomon Ucko
1034
1034
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
In most cases, two ssh servers can reach each other (or at least one can reach the other), and again in most cases the workstation's internet is far worse than either of the servers.
If so, ordering one server to transfer to the other one is the way to go.
ssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
Check nohup.out
on server1 for errors.
add a comment |
In most cases, two ssh servers can reach each other (or at least one can reach the other), and again in most cases the workstation's internet is far worse than either of the servers.
If so, ordering one server to transfer to the other one is the way to go.
ssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
Check nohup.out
on server1 for errors.
add a comment |
In most cases, two ssh servers can reach each other (or at least one can reach the other), and again in most cases the workstation's internet is far worse than either of the servers.
If so, ordering one server to transfer to the other one is the way to go.
ssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
Check nohup.out
on server1 for errors.
In most cases, two ssh servers can reach each other (or at least one can reach the other), and again in most cases the workstation's internet is far worse than either of the servers.
If so, ordering one server to transfer to the other one is the way to go.
ssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
Check nohup.out
on server1 for errors.
answered 29 mins ago
JoshuaJoshua
38915
38915
add a comment |
add a comment |
You need to use SCP protocol.
scp file you want to transfer login@address_of_second_server:/path_where_you_want_to_save
New contributor
OP wants to copy files between two remote computers, not from local computer to remote computer. He also seems to be looking for a GUI solution.
– user68186
11 hours ago
add a comment |
You need to use SCP protocol.
scp file you want to transfer login@address_of_second_server:/path_where_you_want_to_save
New contributor
OP wants to copy files between two remote computers, not from local computer to remote computer. He also seems to be looking for a GUI solution.
– user68186
11 hours ago
add a comment |
You need to use SCP protocol.
scp file you want to transfer login@address_of_second_server:/path_where_you_want_to_save
New contributor
You need to use SCP protocol.
scp file you want to transfer login@address_of_second_server:/path_where_you_want_to_save
New contributor
New contributor
answered 11 hours ago
GravemindGravemind
657
657
New contributor
New contributor
OP wants to copy files between two remote computers, not from local computer to remote computer. He also seems to be looking for a GUI solution.
– user68186
11 hours ago
add a comment |
OP wants to copy files between two remote computers, not from local computer to remote computer. He also seems to be looking for a GUI solution.
– user68186
11 hours ago
OP wants to copy files between two remote computers, not from local computer to remote computer. He also seems to be looking for a GUI solution.
– user68186
11 hours ago
OP wants to copy files between two remote computers, not from local computer to remote computer. He also seems to be looking for a GUI solution.
– user68186
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1116153%2ftransfer-files-between-two-remote-ssh-servers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
I suspect there's a perfectly good reason why
ssh server1 nohup scp somefile server2:somefile
isn't an answer but the question doesn't exclude it.– Joshua
9 hours ago
@Joshua - I suspect that the questioner hasn't considered it - you should submit that as an answer.
– Stobor
3 hours ago
@Stobor: Done..
– Joshua
29 mins ago