Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 16:21:40 -0500 (EST) From: Jamie Bowden <jamie@itribe.net> To: "Jason C. Wells" <jcwells@u.washington.edu> Cc: FreeBSD-chat <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Diskless Workstations Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.96.981130162103.5432F-100000@animaniacs.itribe.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SGI.3.96.981130153922.5432D-100000@animaniacs.itribe.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 30 Nov 1998, Jamie Bowden wrote: > On Mon, 30 Nov 1998, Jason C. Wells wrote: > > > >No it can't. And NFS doesn't compete for latency. But many users > > >don't need that sort of filesystem throughput. > > > > If 100 Mbps => 80 Mbps then 100bT is as good or better than UW-SCSI on > > bandwidth. This is what I based my statement on. It appears that I have a > > concept error somehow. The numbers look right to me. Can someone steer me > > straight? > > SCSI measures throughput in Megabytes/s, not Megabits/s. And as a note I missed the first time, UW is 40MB/s, not 80MB/s. Jamie Bowden -- Systems Administrator, iTRiBE.net If we've got to fight over grep, sign me up. But boggle can go. -Ted Faber (on Hasbro's request for removal of /usr/games/boggle) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SGI.3.96.981130162103.5432F-100000>