From: Robert G. W. <rw...@lx...> - 2001-02-12 23:51:26
|
Here, I really encourage people not to do disk intensive stuff like compiles over NFS. They do it anyway and we make do with fast switches. Sure NFS is lots slower than local disk. Local disk is lots slower than RAM. RAM is lots slower than in processor cache. But we use all these things because the benefits outweigh the latency costs. I think you have to make do in the world that we live in rather than the "ideal" one. Robert G. Werner rw...@lx... Impeach Conggress!! Q: Why did the programmer call his mother long distance? A: Because that was her name. On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 ra...@ra... wrote: > On 12 Feb, Robert G. Werner scribbled: > -> Just a note from industry: > -> NFS for home directories is "HOW ITS DONE(tm)". > -> You aren't going to find an environment larger than 10-15 machines > -> (imho, of course) that isn't using NFS or something similar. > -> > -> As a Sysad, I can't imagine why I would want to make rsynch work for my 200 > -> users. > > true - but it doesnt change the fact that nfs degrades performance > somehting horrid - i did timings on cimpiels in my homedir over nfs. > doign them in /tmp was 3-4 times faster. need i say more. admins like > nfs. in practice it makes things suck royally. > > yes admittedly e17's code isnt as optmized as it shoudl or could be - > but there's a README that states all of what you need to klnow "it's in > progress - dont judge a car when its half-built" > > -- > --------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------------- > The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ra...@ra... ra...@va... > ra...@en... ra...@li... > ra...@zi... > |