Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux.development:23038 comp.os.386bsd.development:3106 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!news.netspace.net.au!serval.net.wsu.edu!news.clark.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!lamarck.sura.net!hookup!newshost.marcam.com!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gumby!andrews-cc!gillham From: gillham@andrews.edu (Andrew Gillham) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.386bsd.development Subject: Re: SAMBA and NETWARE mounting Date: 28 Jan 1995 05:46:25 GMT Organization: Andrews University Lines: 48 Message-ID: <3gclnh$f6n@orion.cc.andrews.edu> References: <3eo2j1$l5o@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> <D2y5tv.JAC@indirect.com> <D30Ap1.2tt@pe1chl.ampr.org> <D33Jw6.D41@indirect.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: edmund.cs.andrews.edu In article <D33Jw6.D41@indirect.com> wes@indirect.com (Barnacle Wes) writes: > >No, no, not "PC" NFS, just real, live NFS. Of course, my current >employer sells NFS for DOS, but I haven't really looked at it that >much. I thought I was reading this in comp.os.386bsd or comp.os.linux?? >Oh, I am. Thank God! I thought I'd lost my mind for a minute! I love NFS, I don't like using Netware, but damn it let's not pretend that NFS v2 on UDP is Nirvana. Yes there are problems with Netware, but but there are problems with NFS also. Still, I can get about 1.5MB/s between a Netware server (486/66 32bit token-ring), and a DOS client (Pentium/60 32bit token-ring). I don't get this on my NFS. >Cetainly YES more than with NFS. Eliminating SAP is a great start. >NFS is less verbose in several other critical operations as well. Please, don't confuse SAP broadcasts with file server speed. Certainly a large number of SAPs can adversely affect the network, but the Netware comments were about speed of the server, not about the service broadcasts. One client, one server, one piece of coax, and SAPs don't mean shit. On a local segment I think Netware will outperform NFS, but without router filtering, a big Netware WAN turns into a SAPfest. >The difference in network traffic would depend greatly on access >patterns, such as do you use lots of little files, or a few large >files, and how deep your directory structures are, but the last >time I looked, the NetWare protocols looked much more "chatty" than >evil old NFS. Yup, but if you look at just the local network, and NFS vs Netware on the same hardware, I would say that Netware would be faster. I would also guess that the CPU on the server would be pretty much wasted. :-) Of course in the real world we have gobs of subnets and plenty of those are WAN connections... In this scenario Netware just doesn't cut it. But the comparisons the other guy was making were with regard to raw speed. Anyway, here in the UN*X newsgroups we all pretty much agree that TCP/IP, NFS, UN*X, NFS, etc.. makes everything else look Nintendo, but that doesn't mean the occasional OS won't have a decent feature. -Andrew -- ========================================================== Andrew Gillham gillham@andrews.edu LAN/WAN/Netware/Unix Analyst gillham@whirlpool.com ==========================================================