*BSD News Article 29800


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.linux.misc:13556 comp.os.386bsd.misc:2391 comp.unix.unixware:4276 comp.unix.solaris:15190
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.unixware,comp.unix.solaris
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!xlink.net!news.ppp.de!lutzifer!wavehh.hanse.de!cracauer
From: cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de (Martin Cracauer)
Subject: Re: A good NFS server ?
Message-ID: <1994Apr28.144110.25743@wavehh.hanse.de>
Organization: The Internet
References: <2pfj7f$d5l@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> <2pg694$e52@hermes.unt.edu>
Distribution: inet
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 94 14:41:10 GMT
Lines: 25

byron@ocf.nms.unt.edu (Byron Goodman) writes:

>dan@dna.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu wrote:
>: 	I have been thinking about giving Linux a try, but I have heard that
>: it isn't a very good NFS server. What is the current state of the Linux NFS
>: server ?
>: 	Would FreeBSD, NetBSD, Unixware or Solaris X86 be better choices as
>: an NFS server ? I would be doing a lot of multi-Mbyte reads and writes to it.
>: How do these UNIX variants compare as far as NFS implementation is concerned ?
>I personally seem to think that FreeBSD is faster that most other UNIX's 
>availble for 80x86 processors.  You probably won't believe me, but I'm
>using an 8bit 3com 3c503 running FreeBSD 1.1-BETA on a 486SX and it out
>performs a SCO System running SCO Unix 4.2.4 on a NE2000 ethernet card
>that runs on a 486DX50.

Me, too. My 486-DX ISA with WD 8013 and 1542 outperforms any other
PC-Unix I drove on it (Linux, Esix 4.0.4, SCO). 

The performance both as a server and a client is compareable to my
SPARC's (which has faster disks).

Additionally FreeBSD is capable of using NFS over tcp. Should be much
faster over slow lines.
-- 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Martin.Cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de, Fax. +41 40 5228536, German language accepted