Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rice!sun-spots-request From: krempel@pacrat.npac.syr.edu (Henry B.J. Krempel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun Subject: Re: Advice wanted on fileservers and net-loading Message-ID: <8812101751.AA12525@PacRat.NPAC.syr.edu> Date: 20 Dec 88 00:57:12 GMT Sender: usenet@rice.edu Organization: Sun-Spots Lines: 61 Approved: Sun-Spots@rice.edu Original-Date: Sat, 10 Dec 88 12:51:37 -0500 X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 7, Issue 62, message 7 of 12 What I would do is split the network into 2 subnets. This insures conclusively that the network traffic is divided, without relying on "smartness" of bridges. It also makes solving network problems easier to track down. I would buy another system, like the 4/260 you mentioned, or I might favor a 4/280S with a cartidge drive (it's cheaper) and for backups you might use a 2GB video cartridge, like the one Perfect Byte sells. The new system should have 2 ethernet interfaces, to serve as a gateway for the new subnet you are creating. Then you can do one of the following: Campus Ethernet --------|-----------------------------------------------| | | server1: 3/180S new server | | | | 5 - 3/50's 5 - 3/50s Sun-3 diskless machines Sun 4 diskless OR: Campus Ethernet --------|-------------------------------------------- | server1: 3/180S | | 5 - 3/50's Sun-3 diskless machines new server | | 5 - 3/50s Sun 4 diskless It depends on how much you like heirarchy, also, if you are doing backups for the new server using the 3/180S' tape drive, the second option might be better. Then, you can set it up with either fstab or automounter so that users get their home directories wherever they are, putting peoples directories on networks where they do most of their work. Also, set up mail so all of this appears as one host, with the mail directory being NFS mounted. This has a few advantages: Server1 is a homogenous server, a sun-3 serving sun-3's, easier to maintain, and there have been performance problems seen in earlier issues with Sun 3's serving Sun-4's. The 4MB 50's are spread across two different networks, drastically reducing network load. I run a network with 6-3/50's on it and a bunch of 8MB systems, and the network load is fine. You are backing up 2 systems, instead of one for each workstation. Henry B. J. Krempel Syracuse University 250 Machinery Hall Syracuse, N.Y. 13244