Xref: utzoo news.software.b:1525 news.software.nntp:62
Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!husc6!uwvax!rutgers!gatech!ncar!oddjob!gargoyle!att!alberta!oha!access!edm!rroot
From: rroot@edm.UUCP (Stephen Samuel)
Newsgroups: news.software.b,news.software.nntp
Subject: Re: Reading news: NNTP v.s. NFS for access to the database
Message-ID: <3249@edm.UUCP>
Date: 5 Aug 88 08:03:52 GMT
References: <19153@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Organization: Unexsys Systems Inc., Edmonton,AB.
Lines: 23

From article <19153@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>, by bob@kazoo.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield):
> In article <4246@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu> fair@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Erik E. Fair) writes:
>>In article <16342@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> bob@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield) writes:
>>>A secondary reason why I personally prefer to use NFS to read news
>>>is because it's actually faster than using the NNTP protocol.  I

>>Bob, can you quantify this? In particular, I'd like to know where
>>NNTP is taking the hit in performance.  Context switching? I'd be
By my understanding, NNTP goes thru TCP/IP, while NFS is a different proto
alltoghether, which is optimized to transparent use of an FS over a net..
NFS seems to be a bit better at flinging the data fast (I remember comments
about people bragging about how their NFS implementation could swamp the
controller/software on X machine, and a solution Which ammounted to being
able to tell another implementation to "SLOW DOWN (damnit!)".

On the other hand, I've heard comments on how TCP/IP can be CPU intensive and
hardware support might help CPUs keep up with the abilities of faster 
network hardware.
-- 
-------------
 Stephen Samuel 
  {ihnp4,ubc-vision,vax135}!alberta!edm!steve
  or userzxcv@uofamts.bitnet