Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!spdcc!kaos!romkey
From: romkey@kaos.UUCP (John Romkey)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: NFS vs RFS (actually, vs Sprite and Andrew)
Message-ID: <724@kaos.UUCP>
Date: 16 Mar 88 19:12:59 GMT
References: <10370@ut-sally.UUCP> <720@uel.uel.co.uk> <1695@uoregon.UUCP> <45660@sun.uucp>
Reply-To: romkey@kaos.UUCP (John Romkey)
Organization: Chaos; Somerville, MA
Lines: 17
Keywords: NFS, ANDREW, TOCS, consistency

In article <45660@sun.uucp> nowicki%rose@Sun.COM (Bill Nowicki) writes:
:In article <1695@uoregon.UUCP>, jqj@uoregon.UUCP (JQ Johnson) writes:
:: 1/	scalability to large systems, because of excessive network
:: 	traffic, excessive server cpu loading, or difficulty in 
:: 	administration;
:
:As for scalability,
:I would estimate about 100,000 installed systems running NFS.
:Last I heard, about 500 run Andrew, and perhaps a few dozen run Sprite.

Uh, 'total users in the known universe' is not what JQ Johnson was
talking about. Ability to scale up a single NFS installation is...
-- 
			- john romkey
		...harvard!spdcc!kaos!romkey
		       romkey@kaos.uucp
		    romkey@xx.lcs.mit.edu