From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Mar 10 3:42:40 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3552D37BA54 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2000 03:42:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA07092; Fri, 10 Mar 2000 04:14:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 04:14:13 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E9rome_OUFELLA?= Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Choices for big NFS server? Message-ID: <20000310041413.M14279@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <38C8D2A5.5B2A33D4@esil.univ-mrs.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <38C8D2A5.5B2A33D4@esil.univ-mrs.fr>; from la.firme@esil.univ-mrs.fr on Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 10:47:01AM +0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Jérome OUFELLA [000310 03:19] wrote: > Hi, > We need to use FreeBSD as a quite big (~150GB) NFS server serving > around 200 clients. > The hardware is ready-to-go, and the installation time has come. > > Is it worth it to use FreeBSD 4.0-CURRENT (as I heard, becoming -RELEASE > on next monday?), or is the NFS performance gain for such a server > minimal compared to 3.4-STABLE ? In which case I'd rather use that > (3.4-)stable branch on my server. > > The server is quite fast, using SMP, and has a bunch of FastEthernet > adapters. I think 4.0 would be the best bet. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message