Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!rutgers!ucsd!helios.ee.lbl.gov!epb2.lbl.gov!envbvs
From: envbvs@epb2.lbl.gov (Brian V. Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.ultrix
Subject: Re: Managing a network of UNIX workstations
Message-ID: <4624@helios.ee.lbl.gov>
Date: 14 Jan 90 19:11:22 GMT
References: <3949@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> <9338@cbmvax.commodore.com> <12938@watcgl.waterloo.edu>
Sender: usenet@helios.ee.lbl.gov
Reply-To: envbvs@epb2.lbl.gov (Brian V. Smith)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley
Lines: 20
X-Local-Date: 14 Jan 90 11:11:22 PST

In article <12938@watcgl.waterloo.edu> idallen@watcgl.waterloo.edu (Ian! D. Allen [CGL]) writes:
< We've had no success trying to do software development over NFS.  You
< can run applications over NFS, since all they have to do is load over
< the net once; but, the compile/edit/test cycle involves too many file
< accesses.  A compile or "make" can reference dozens of files, and the
< network overhead getting at each file was too much.  We gave it up and
< don't use NFS for much more than moving things from far away to local
< disk where we can work on it.

Well, I don't know what kind of machine(s) you have, but on our
modest little Vaxstation II, we often compile the whole X11R4 tree
over NFS from a machine that has enough disk space to store the whole source.

Both the source and object files are stored on the remote NFS server and
there never seems to be too much of a network load because of this.
--
_____________________________________
Brian V. Smith    (bvsmith@lbl.gov)
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
I don't speak for LBL, these non-opinions are all mine.