Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!fluke!ssc-vax!benoni
From: benoni@ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re: Apollo's NFS !!
Message-ID: <2057@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: 1 Jul 88 02:34:14 GMT
References: <155@apcisea.UUCP>
Organization: Boeing Aerospace Corp., Seattle WA
Lines: 53

in article <155@apcisea.UUCP>, chinn@apciseaapcisea.UUCP (3C3AF053.B0012B28) says:
> 
> In article <2027@ssc-vax.UUCP>, benoni@ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel) writes:
> 
>> Since my initial posting I have seen a demo of Apollo NFS and it seems like 
> 
> You mean you've been flaming us all this time and you hadn't even seen the
> product yet !!! :-).
As I clearly stated I was looking to get the product for an eventual network
that involved an SGI machine and some PCs.  I had looked at some fairly
complete benchmarks of Apollo NFS, plus I had been asking LOTS of questions
prior to my posting.  As I mentioned some of the people were telling me
that Apollo to Apollo binaries over NFS would not execute...(i was
confirming this unfortunate state of affairs in Apollo-land)...so given
that discouraging bit of information...I didn't have very high hopes
for it working with the SGI or PCs...(thus enter my inquiry)...

By the way does not owning the product change the fact that it doesn't
execute Apollo executables? or that it is dramatically slower than other
versions of NFS? or should I foolishly go out and naively
buy it only to find out and skip what I've learned from many others?
  
> useful is a relative term. Certainly you can get the NFS functionality 
> required, (if you want), but most people want to use things like the single
> name space, display manager capabilities and etc, even on the nodes which are
> physically far away from each other.

My interest is for machine x to use machine y's disk, printers, etc.
I am not that interested in the display managers capabilities as a 
priority.

> This can, of course be done using internets.  And please don't tell me 
> you don't like it cause it is different; how many products have you ever 
> developed in which you made absolutely no design decisions to tradeoff 
> commonality for functionality?  And ether bridge is something like 3 
> commands and no configuration files to edit.
> (One could argue that it is easier than setting up NFS on a Sun.)  
Seeing as I just set NFS on a Sun up, I assume it must be very easy.
Again NFS provides a transparent cover which we intend to use with PCs,
Macs, SGIs and other machines...if Ether Bridge fits that (I know nothing
about Ether Bridge) then I am open-minded about the situation....if it
doesn't provide the same tranparent behavior then....i'm not....i certainly
will look into it...

> apollo is the  only company that has this particular problem is 
> patently untrue; it turns out

You are correct in stating that Apollo is not unique to this problem.
As I have discovered from digging deeper.  However, given the number
of machines that work with NFS it might be in a companies interest
to fix it.
-------
My opinions are naturally my own.