Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!oliveb!pyramid!prls!philabs!sbcs!root
From: root@sbcs (Root)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Amiga NFS
Message-ID: <770@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Tue, 20-Oct-87 22:59:28 EST
Article-I.D.: sbcs.770
Posted: Tue Oct 20 22:59:28 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Oct-87 16:50:04 EST
References: <8710171825.AA13108@cory.Berkeley.EDU> <3151@ccicpg.UUCP>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 29
Summary: NFS can run faster than Amiga HD (at least for now)

In article <3151@ccicpg.UUCP>, harald@ccicpg.UUCP ( Harald Milne) writes:
>
> 	My understanding of the hard disk throughput problem is OS related, not
> driver related. From what I have heard, even DMA hard disks suffer greatly from
> this problem. NFS being a DOS device, would only share in this headache. The
> bottome line is, NFS can't run faster than a hard disk, bandwidth asside.
> Am I wrong?

	NFS can run faster than an Amiga hard disk, at least using the
	"old" (ie current) filesystem.  Why?  Because most NFS servers
	I know of are running on machines which use the Berkeley FFS -
	FFS squeezes quite a bit more performance out of a given disk
	that does the current AmigaDOS format.  Expect this to change
	once C=A releases their new filesystem.

	Note that Ameristar has never sold NFS as a cheaper, faster
	hard disk replacement - the strengths of networked disks
	are sharability of data, better economy of scale in sharing one
	large drive over several machines, and of course linking the Amiga
	into pre-existing networks.

> -- 
> Work: Computer Consoles Inc. (CCI), Advanced Development Group (ADG)
>       Irvine, CA (RISCy business! Home of the CCI POWER 6/32)
> UUCP: uunet!ccicpg!harald

					Rick Spanbauer
					SUNY/Stony Brook
					(& Ameristar)