Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!mintaka!ogicse!pdxgate!steele!kozowski
From: kozowski@ohsu.edu (Eric Kozowski)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: UN*X ffs vs. OS/2 hpfs for file server
Message-ID: <1991Jun12.161147.12874@ohsu.edu>
Date: 12 Jun 91 16:11:47 GMT
References: <1991Jun11.175144.24736@cfctech.cfc.com>
Organization: Oregon Health Sciences University
Lines: 21

In article <1991Jun11.175144.24736@cfctech.cfc.com> norm@cfctech.cfc.com (Norman J. Meluch) writes:
>Right now we have a IBM PS/2 Model 95 (33MHz 486) running OS/2 1.3 EE
>and Lan Manager 2.0 with a 3Com MC/32 (3C527) ethernet card.
>
>There are those that suggest that we should try comparing this to an
>AT&T Star Server E running UNIX SVR4.0.2.1 and their StarGroup software
>version 3.4b, using a berkely fast file system partition.
>
>Anyone have any feel as to whether these servers would be comparable
>in terms of file access speed/throughput, or whether one is better
>than another?

From the specs I've seen the AT&T StarServer E should blow the PS/2 95
out of the water.  I'm not familiar enough with OS/2 to say that ffs is
faster than the OS/2 file system (but I suspect that it is).

-- 
Eric Kozowski         
kozowski@ohsu.edu
Networks & Computing Dept.
Oregon Health Sciences University