|
From: David J. <da...@jo...> - 2002-11-05 19:48:44
|
On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 19:47, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Hi *, > > Something I've been wondering since I found out about LTSP is the > following: why does LTSP use swapping over NFS (which is pretty slow, > considering the overhead of a filesystem) when the Network Block Device > (NBD) was specifically created for this purpose? > > If the answer is "We didn't know about NBD" then, well, you do now. I'm > even willing to help out doing the support for NBD, if that help is > wanted and/or needed. > > If you did know about it, but chose to go the NFS way for other reasons, > I'd like to know those. Being a disk server protocol rather than a > file-server protocol, NBD is slightly faster as compared to NFS, for > purposes like this. It even is the case that on my m68k-mac, NBD seems > faster[1] than the (poorly supported, under Linux) SCSI harddisk. Which > is amazing, considering the fact that the network here is a 10Base2 > coaxial ethernet. If I remember correctly, NBD wasn't available when Jim first built remote swapping into LTSP. Also, NFS was already working. NBD-swap sounds interesting; I'll help if I can. -David |