Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 12:06:08 -0800 (PST) From: "Jason C. Wells" <jcwells@u.washington.edu> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: FreeBSD-chat <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Diskless Workstations Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811301155550.419-100000@s8-37-26.student.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <199811290843.AAA00385@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 29 Nov 1998, Mike Smith wrote: >> Jason Wrote: >> Sometime ago I asked folks about NC's. Now I am back. Once again I am >> armed with just enough info to be dangerous. > >Flee! :) >> It seems that running diskless has a serious advantage of using the same >> disk space for all of the programs that all the users need. 100baseT can >> compete with UW-SCSI bit for bit on bandwidth. > >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? Thanks for the insight from all who replied. I sent that email some time ago. Is the list only now receiving it? Catchya Later, | UW Mechanical Engineering Jason Wells | http://weber.u.washington.edu/~jcwells/ 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.BSF.4.05.9811301155550.419-100000>